From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 04:44:59 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id DAA06104; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 03:48:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sky.net (solar.sky.net [198.70.175.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id DAA04441 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 03:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sky.net.sky.net (ip92.kc.sky.net [206.230.165.92])
by sky.net (8.8.6/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA19863;
Wed, 1 Oct 1997 05:23:44 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971001051937.00e17cc8@solar.sky.net>
X-Sender: price@solar.sky.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 05:19:37 -0500
To: "Nathan J. Mehl"
From: Paul Allen Rice
Subject: Re: Today's award for "Most Obfuscated Bounce Message"
Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <199709301951.PAA18099@horton-x.whoville.leftbank.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 03:51 PM 9/30/97 -0400, the following was submitted for consideration by
Nathan J. Mehl:
>
>...goes without question to the lovely folks over at webtv.net:
>
>> ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
>>
>
>Sheesh.
>
>-n
Sort of reminds me of the following sub announcement majordomo sent me
earlier this summer...
PTS#u#CBH#u#D#c#PTS#u#CBH#u#D.PTS#u#CBH#u#P#c#DelaiR@health.qld.gov.au
That's one helluva long address. I'd hate to type it in everytime. I
verified it with the person who had it. She's a helth official in, if I
remember right, Queensgate, Australia. In any event, the postmaster down
there apparantly dishes these out to everyone. Shortly after this was
received, I received a note from the person indicating it would change to a
most human readably style.
Oh well...
Paul
------------------------------------------------------------
(o)(o) Paul Rice
> Listowner: CircleJoke and Underground Mailling Lists
\/ mailto:PaulRice@Broadcast.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards
could produce the Complete Works of Shakespeare; now, thanks
to the Internet, we know this is not true."
--Robert Wilensky, University of California
------------------------------------------------------------
Support the anti-Spam amendment, go to http://www.cauce.org
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 07:45:48 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id HAA11602; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:18:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id HAA11500 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:17:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eskimo.com (berg@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA32057; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:18:23 -0700
From: Berg
Received: by eskimo.com (8.8.7) id HAA16170; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710011418.HAA16170@eskimo.com>
To: adamb@tezcat.com
Subject: Re: AOL upgrade
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I wonder...would CCing a complaint about something illegal to the
relevant federal agency cause AOL to react quicker...? ;)
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 15:14:43 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id OAA12143; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 14:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hustle.rahul.net (hustle.rahul.net [192.160.13.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id OAA11940 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 14:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LunaCity.UUCP by hustle.rahul.net with UUCP id AA26359
(5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Wed, 1 Oct 1997 14:33:03 -0700
Received: by LunaCity.com (1.65/waf)
via UUCP; Wed, 01 Oct 97 14:28:48 PDT
for list-managers@greatcircle.com
To: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: AOL upgrade - B.S.
From: alyson l abramowitz
Message-Id:
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 97 14:23:52 PDT
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19970930210940.008f56d0@mail.wco.com>
Organization:
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
AOL as a service holds no personal interest for me but I've got to say
that my experience with them in the past year is that they are probably
the most responsive site to closing down spam relatively quickly.
It's rarely a day that goes by when I don't send them a new spam. And
they do respond and shut down the users who do so. This is more than
I can say for most of the other large services. They have less spam'ers
coming though but they rarely do anything about them.
So I wonder why they are responsive to me but not some of the rest of you
folks?
In any case, I can tell you that abuse@aol.com appears to be looked at
and handled regularly from my experience.
Best,
Alyson
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 15:44:51 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id PAA25289; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id PAA25191 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id PAA22102; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710012240.PAA22102@shell7.ba.best.com>
From: Cyndi Norman
To: berg@eskimo.com
CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@shell7.ba.best.com
In-reply-to: <199710011418.HAA16170@eskimo.com> (message from Berg on Wed, 1
Oct 1997 07:18:19 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: AOL upgrade
Reply-to: cnorman@best.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
From: Berg
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
I wonder...would CCing a complaint about something illegal to the
relevant federal agency cause AOL to react quicker...? ;)
IMHO you should only send complaints to a federal agency if you feel that
is the appropriate way to deal with the problem of the person you are
complaining about. CC'ing them to "threaten" or hold a whip over AOL or
any other place that isn't responding to your complaint fast enough is
not productive.
In the case of death threats or other messages where you are in fear of
your life or personal safety, by all means involve as many agencies and
orgs as you need. But not as a tool for speeding up response in an
unrelated org for a non-emergency.
I realize you were probably kidding but I wouldn't want anyone else to
misread your statement and take it seriously.
Cyndi
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman
something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com
__________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 17:29:54 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id RAA16157; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 17:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from netguide.com (nexus.netguide.com [199.108.80.129]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id RAA16018 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 17:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from delundel.netguide.com by netguide.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA12518; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 17:23:17 -0700
Message-ID: <3432EA2B.71B8@netguide.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:26:19 -0700
From: David Lundell
Reply-To: delundel@netguide.com
Organization: CMP Media, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com
Subject: Subscription Verification
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Hi all-
I currently coordinate the list management of 11 mailing lists with a
total of 350,000+ subscribers. The lists are opt-in periodic newsletters
(not discussion lists). Most of our subscriptions come to us via a Web
interface on our site. Currently, we do not verify subscriptions.
We recently had an event where someone was subscribed to all of our
mailing lists, along with a bunch of lists produced by other
organizations -- a kind of mail bombing attack most of you are probably
somewhat familiar with.
To make a long story short, the event is forcing us to evaluate the
verification issue. I'd love feedback from you all regarding how you
have set up your lists, and your thoughts on the following issues.
First and foremost, do you feel, from an ethical standpoint, that
mailing list administrators should always verify a user before
subscribing that user?
I'd also love to hear your thoughts on whether, legally, the victim of
such an attack has grounds for recourse against a list provider.
Also, does anyone verify unsubscribes too? If so, what are the merits of
that?
Lastly, if any of you have switched from no verification at all to some
type of verification, did you notice a slow-down in the growth of your
lists?
Forgive me if I'm raising an issue that has been discussed here -- I've
only been on this list for a couple months. All feedback and pointers to
information sources are very welcome.
Thanks!
David Lundell
Producer, E-mail Products
CMPnet: http://www.cmpnet.com
Free newsletters on technology and the Internet at:
http://www.techweb.com/delivery/delivery.html
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 18:29:35 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id SAA28264; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 18:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from quilla.tezcat.com (quilla.tezcat.com [204.128.247.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id SAA28175 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 18:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [206.230.56.44] (adamb.tezcat.com [206.230.56.44])
by quilla.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id UAA27630
for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:23:07 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199710020123.UAA27630@quilla.tezcat.com>
Subject: Re: Subscription Verification
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 97 20:23:49 -0500
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v2, June 6, 1997
From: Adam Bailey
To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 10/1/97 7:26 PM CDT, David Lundell wrote...
>First and foremost, do you feel, from an ethical standpoint, that
>mailing list administrators should always verify a user before
>subscribing that user?
Most list owners will say yes. On an ethical standpoint, I tend to agree.
With that said, most of my lists do not require confirmation to
subscribe. This is primarily because the majority of my lists are geared
towards very non-technical people who have trouble understanding the
concept of verification.
So, unless I have a problem, I leave verification off. One one list, I
had to turn it on because I started getting bogus subscriptions. All my
other public lists remain with confirmation off, and I haven't had any
problems.
>I'd also love to hear your thoughts on whether, legally, the victim of
>such an attack has grounds for recourse against a list provider.
Keep in mind the current state of legal affairs when it comes to the net.
Courts are only barely aware that the Internet exists, and very little
legal ground has been covered. While I suppose a case could be made for
negligence against the list host, I wouldn't worry about it. Certainly
not until after laws are in place to guard against UCE.
>Also, does anyone verify unsubscribes too? If so, what are the merits of
>that?
I don't require confirmation for unsubscribe commands. Personally, I find
it extremely annoying when I'm trying to get off a list and I have to
confirm it.
Faking a signoff request is a lot different than faking a signon request.
It's not a way to spam someone for obvious reasons, so it probably
doesn't have much. A minor annoyance, at best, and the person can always
re-subscribe themself.
>Lastly, if any of you have switched from no verification at all to some
>type of verification, did you notice a slow-down in the growth of your
>lists?
Hard to say, since the list for which I turned confirmation on
experiences very slow growth anyways. If it dropped from one new
subscriber a week to one new subscriber every two weeks, I wouldn't have
noticed.
--
Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| "Do not take life too seriously;
adamb@tezcat.com | you will never get out of it alive."
adamkb@aol.com | - Elbert Hubbard
Finger for PGP | http://www.tezcat.com/~adamb
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 18:44:23 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id SAA01418; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 18:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id SAA01172 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 18:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from onramp.armchair.mb.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.8.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-970426)
id RAA21589; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 17:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dave (dave.armchair.mb.ca [198.163.115.50]) by onramp.armchair.mb.ca (8.8.7/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA11836; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:59:36 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971001195645.00c3d6f0@armchair.mb.ca>
X-Sender: dave@armchair.mb.ca
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 19:56:45 -0500
To: delundel@netguide.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Dave Voorhis
Subject: Re: Subscription Verification
In-Reply-To: <3432EA2B.71B8@netguide.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 05:26 PM 10/1/97 -0700, David Lundell wrote:
>First and foremost, do you feel, from an ethical standpoint, that
>mailing list administrators should always verify a user before
>subscribing that user?
Do you mean manually, or via automated mechanisms in the MLM software? I
find that the automated verification mechanism in Majordomo (for example)
handles that very well. After suffering numerous prank s*bscriptions
earlier this year, they almost dropped to zero after enabling verification.
I say "almost", because I've had a few cases where the prankster obtained
a NetAddress account, s*bscribed to lists, and then set the account to
forward to the victim. Of course, verification won't prevent that.
>Lastly, if any of you have switched from no verification at all to some
>type of verification, did you notice a slow-down in the growth of your
>lists?
I don't have any hard numbers to back it up (though I could produce them,
if anyone's really interested), but I'd say there's been a very slight
slow-down on my lists. I attribute that to the slight difficulty (if you
can call it that) of processing the verifications, as it prevents
s*bscriptions from those who are completely unable to follow written
directions. I do not consider that to be a bad thing, because it helps
keep those who are unable to manage their email from repeatedly
demonstrating that fact in front of thousands of other people.
Dave Voorhis
mailto:dave@armchair.mb.ca
http://www.armchair.mb.ca/~dave
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 1 20:44:44 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id TAA10805; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sportsurf.net (sportsurf.net [192.41.36.58]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id TAA10531 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.204.56.156] (sss.pittsburgh.net [192.204.56.156]) by sportsurf.net (8.8.5) id UAA02852; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:51:16 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199710020251.UAA02852@sportsurf.net>
X-Authentication-Warning: sportsurf.net: Host sss.pittsburgh.net [192.204.56.156] claimed to be [192.204.56.156]
Subject: Fwd: Re: distinction among: owner, monitor and moderator
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 97 23:00:40 -0000
x-sender: mark@sportsurf.net
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Mark Rauterkus
To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Hi,
Did you all see this? I was CCed and it didn't hit the list. ..... I
think it has some clever ideas.
Mark
---- snagged snip comes below. ----
> >For the purposes of this research, we are making a distinction among the
> >following roles: list owner, list monitor and list moderator.
With our program, we decided to break up the responsibilites and came up
with the
following different security roles:
* server admin: has rights to all lists on the server, can do anything
using the web interface or email commands. Doesn't receive any mail
from
any list. Receives software update notifications from us.
* site admin: has rights over all the lists in their "site" (ie: a
grouping
of lists), similar responsibilities as a server admin. Can change
virtual site settings (such as hostname, look & feel, etc).
* list admin: can add/delete members, moderate, change FAQs, action
phrases, autoresponders & change all list settings. Has no rights to
anything but their own list.
Members can also have any of the following extra rights, which are single
yes/no parameters:
* moderator: receives moderated message notifications, and can approve
them
* owner: receives mail sent to the owner-listname@... address
* error mail receiver: has opted to receive notifications of error mail
that Lyris has processed
* announcer: can send messages to the list, no matter what the
moderation
settings are
* poster: is allowed to send contributions when a list is set to reject
non-posters (for example, a magazine with an author pool might use
this)
This works pretty well for us. However, we do get a lot of requests for a
more limited list admin role, where the server administrator could remove
specific functions from the list admin's menu. Usually, the server
administrator fears that the admin is a danger to themselves, and will
tinker
with the wrong things, thus screwing up their own list (mucking with the
open/closed/private/password security setting, for instance)
> To take this one step further, I'm not even happy with the term, "LIST." The
> LIST term is one that is getting old, IMHO, but should get dropped in the
> next round of changes.
Agreed. Several years ago, when we used to sell InfoMagnet (a windows
front
end to L.) we called them "Email Discussion Groups". However, the term
"Discussion Groups" has now been coopted by the Newsgroup folks (that's
what
DejaNews calls them). And besides, "Discussion Groups" doesn't do justice
to
announcement lists and moderated-edit lists, which in many cases is what
people are more familiar with.
Nowadays, we simply call them "email lists" and say that there are several
kinds of "email lists", such as "owner-controlled announcement lists",
"moderated discussions", "moderated user-contributed announcements", and
"open
discussions". Recently, a new type has become popular, which we call
"DocBots", as in "Document Robots". Surveys, document repositories, and
other
"email databases" fall into this general category, where there is an
active
relationship between the user and the list server.
PS: I sent this message to the list several days ago, but it never was
distributed. If Majordomo suddenly decides to distribute my week-old
post,
my apologies for sending two -err- now three copies.
John
jbuckman@shelby.com
http://www.shelby.com
Developers of *an other* Email List Server
end mudged snip ----
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 00:30:07 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id XAA02844; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id XAA02730 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from amys-answers.com ([205.160.203.108]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id FAA02161 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 05:47:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199709291247.FAA02161@honor.greatcircle.com>
Received: from famroom.amys-answers.com by amys-answers.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.2CAEB6A0@amys-answers.com>; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 7:49:11 -0500
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Amy Stinson"
Organization: Amy's Answers
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:38:35 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
Reply-to: amys@amys-answers.com
In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19970925141941.00ee2994@mail.idyllmtn.com>
References:
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I am now cleaning up hundreds of bounces. All of my list members at
Juno are being returned as unknown. This started happening
yesterday with *some* of them, but now all of them are being
returned. Is anyone else experiencing this?
amy
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 00:35:28 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id AAA05225; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 00:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id AAA05181 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 00:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from germany.it.earthlink.net (germany-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.123]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id SAA23412 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (ip119.an6-atlanta2.ga.pub-ip.psi.net [38.6.6.119])
by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA01571
for ; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710010146.SAA01571@germany.it.earthlink.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Ray Osborne"
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:42:41 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Reply-to: tekjobs@themall.net
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Hi,
I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
features of Pegasus. Pegasus has some good filtering characterisitics
but I have been unable to write a script to remove the email
addresses of bounced email from a list.
I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
I am unaware of. At the moment I am employing a work at home secretary
to keep my databases of email addresses fined tuned.
What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
are no longer useful ? If you discussed this already then I would
appreciate somebody telling me what date so I can find the archive.
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 00:43:13 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id AAA05273; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 00:07:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id AAA05228 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 00:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webdreams.com (www.webdreams.com [199.125.85.28]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id WAA03188 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 22:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost by webdreams.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/29Aug96-0251AM)
id AA07391; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 01:07:17 -0400
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 01:07:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brock Rozen
Reply-To: Brock Rozen
To: Kynn Bartlett
Cc: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>, cnorman@best.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: AOL upgrade - B.S.
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970930213428.00d868e4@mail.idyllmtn.com>
Message-Id:
X-Backup: Disable
X-Url: http://www.torah.org/~brozen
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> Maybe I'm just weird like that. If David has specifically said to
> contact him directly instead of writing to abuse@aol.com, then hey,
> it's his choice. (If he hasn't, though, you're probably out of
> line in suggesting that as the best way to resolve your problems.)
There's a difference between contacting majordomo to unsubscribe from a
list and contacting someone about a spam. One can be handled by an
automated system, the other cannot.
I can sympathize with David, but if he's in charge of taking care of this
and abuse@aol.net isn't doing the job -- then I could care frankly whether
it bothers him or not, just as long as it doesn't bother me anymore!
You see, I can be considerate -- but when other's lack of response begins
to affect me, I no longer care for their workload. Their neglect is
hurting mine and I won't accept that.
Not to say that abuse@aol.net has been bad. They've helped me in many
cases -- but I'm just presenting the situation if they were to get to a
bad situation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Brock Rozen | brozen@torah.org | http://www.torah.org/~brozen |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 00:45:14 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id XAA03308; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id XAA03300 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:58:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from luna2.shelby.com (luna.shelby.com [207.105.6.145]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id TAA07468 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 19:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kuno (kuno [207.105.6.156]) by luna2.shelby.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA24718 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 19:55:07 -0700
Message-Id: <199710010255.TAA24718@luna2.shelby.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "John Buckman"
Organization: Walter Shelby Group Ltd.
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 19:37:38 -0800
Subject: Re: distinction among: owner, monitor and moderator
In-reply-to: <199709261806.MAA15560@sportsurf.net>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> >For the purposes of this research, we are making a distinction among the
> >following roles: list owner, list monitor and list moderator.
With Lyris, we decided to break up the responsibilites and came up with the
following different security roles:
* server admin: has rights to all lists on the server, can do anything
using the web interface or email commands. Doesn't receive any mail from
any list. Receives software update notifications from us.
* site admin: has rights over all the lists in their "site" (ie: a grouping
of lists), similar responsibilities as a server admin. Can change
virtual site settings (such as hostname, look & feel, etc).
* list admin: can add/delete members, moderate, change FAQs, action
phrases, autoresponders & change all list settings. Has no rights to
anything but their own list.
Members can also have any of the following extra rights, which are single
yes/no parameters:
* moderator: receives moderated message notifications, and can approve them
* owner: receives mail sent to the owner-listname@... address
* error mail receiver: has opted to receive notifications of error mail
that Lyris has processed
* announcer: can send messages to the list, no matter what the moderation
settings are
* poster: is allowed to send contributions when a list is set to reject
non-posters (for example, a magazine with an author pool might use this)
This works pretty well for us. However, we do get a lot of requests for a
more limited list admin role, where the server administrator could remove
specific functions from the list admin's menu. Usually, the server
administrator fears that the admin is a danger to themselves, and will tinker
with the wrong things, thus screwing up their own list (mucking with the
open/closed/private/password security setting, for instance)
> To take this one step further, I'm not even happy with the term, "LIST."
> The LIST term is one that is getting old, IMHO, but should get dropped in
> the next round of changes.
Agreed. Several years ago, when we used to sell InfoMagnet (a windows front
end to LISTSERV) we called them "Email Discussion Groups". However, the term
"Discussion Groups" has now been coopted by the Newsgroup folks (that's what
DejaNews calls them). And besides, "Discussion Groups" doesn't do justice to
announcement lists and moderated-edit lists, which in many cases is what
people are more familiar with.
Nowadays, we simply call them "email lists" and say that there are several
kinds of "email lists", such as "owner-controlled announcement lists",
"moderated discussions", "moderated user-contributed announcements", and
"open discussions". Recently, a new type has become popular, which we call
"DocBots", as in "Document Robots". Surveys, document repositories, and
other "email databases" fall into this general category, where there is an
active relationship between the user and the list server.
John
John Buckman
Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com
Developers of Lyris Email List Server
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 01:29:42 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id BAA18052; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 01:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV (cvobku.cvo.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.189.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id BAA18010 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 01:25:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV (MX G5.0) id 5;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 01:26:44 -0700
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 01:26:43 -0700
From: "Henry W. Miller"
To: amys@amys-answers.com
CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com, henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV
Message-ID: <009BB25A.B4A7DDB3.5@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV>
Subject: RE: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> From: MX%"amys@amys-answers.com" 2-OCT-1997 00:33:07.36
> To: MX%"List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
> CC:
> Subj: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
>
On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:38:35 +0000, "Amy Stinson" said:
"Amy Stinson" writes:
> I am now cleaning up hundreds of bounces. All of my list members at
> Juno are being returned as unknown. This started happening
> yesterday with *some* of them, but now all of them are being
> returned. Is anyone else experiencing this?
>
> amy
>
>
Amy,
Oh, yes. It started sometime Sunday afternoon, but appears to
have been fixed by Monday morning, around 0930, PDT.
-HWM
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 03:44:46 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id CAA23960; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:10:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vpm.com ([209.60.152.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id CAA23862 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from root@localhost)
by vpm.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) id CAA22607;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Stout
Message-Id: <199710020911.CAA22607@vpm.com>
Subject: Re: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
To: henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV (Henry W. Miller)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <009BB25A.B4A7DDB3.5@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV> from "Henry W. Miller" at "Oct 2, 97 01:26:43 am"
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I tried emailling a friend that has a juno.com account and it is still
returning 'User unknown' messages as of 10PM 10/01/97.
Mark
> > From: MX%"amys@amys-answers.com" 2-OCT-1997 00:33:07.36
> > To: MX%"List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
> > CC:
> > Subj: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
> >
>
> On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:38:35 +0000, "Amy Stinson" said:
> "Amy Stinson" writes:
>
> > I am now cleaning up hundreds of bounces. All of my list members at
> > Juno are being returned as unknown. This started happening
> > yesterday with *some* of them, but now all of them are being
> > returned. Is anyone else experiencing this?
> >
> > amy
> >
> >
>
>
> Amy,
>
> Oh, yes. It started sometime Sunday afternoon, but appears to
> have been fixed by Monday morning, around 0930, PDT.
>
> -HWM
>
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 04:30:44 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id CAA27951; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV (cvobku.cvo.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.189.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id CAA27800 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV (MX G5.0) id 1;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:40:08 -0700
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:40:07 -0700
From: "Henry W. Miller"
To: mcs@vpm.com
CC: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV
Message-ID: <009BB264.F5B41C86.1@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV>
Subject: Re: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> From: MX%"mcs@vpm.com" "Mark Stout" 2-OCT-1997 02:11:03.08
> To: MX%"henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV"
> CC: MX%"List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
> Subj: Re: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
>
On Thu, 2 Oct 1997 02:11:23 -0700 (PDT), Mark Stout said:
Mark Stout writes:
Mark,
> I tried emailling a friend that has a juno.com account and it is still
> returning 'User unknown' messages as of 10PM 10/01/97.
>
> Mark
>
I hope that this is not too obvious a question, but are you
certain that your friend's email address is still valid? Or maybe it's
a one-shot failure - I have seen that as well.
I would HATE to think that there are hundres, nay thousands of
bouced email messages waiting for the right moment at Juno to spring
forth and get me. (Yes, it has been one of THOSE weeks...)
-HWM
>
> > > From: MX%"amys@amys-answers.com" 2-OCT-1997 00:33:07.36
> > > To: MX%"List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
> > > CC:
> > > Subj: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
> > >
> >
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:38:35 +0000, "Amy Stinson" said:
> > "Amy Stinson" writes:
> >
> > > I am now cleaning up hundreds of bounces. All of my list members at
> > > Juno are being returned as unknown. This started happening
> > > yesterday with *some* of them, but now all of them are being
> > > returned. Is anyone else experiencing this?
> > >
> > > amy
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Amy,
> >
> > Oh, yes. It started sometime Sunday afternoon, but appears to
> > have been fixed by Monday morning, around 0930, PDT.
> >
> > -HWM
> >
>
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 08:25:56 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id IAA26740; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 08:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cyberq.quality.org (cyberq.quality.org [199.181.80.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA26717 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 08:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (help@localhost)
by cyberq.quality.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA01394
for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:08:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:08:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
To: List Managers List
Subject: re: "death threat"
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Will whoever received that please contact me privately? Thanks.
Bill
=============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner, QUALITY.ORG Pager: +1 800 604 6149
President, Associated Quality Consultants, Inc. Fax: +1 703 834 8209
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our Online Quality Resources Website and Bookstore at
http://www.quality.org
=============================================================================
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 10:16:55 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id KAA13954; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hardhead.otw.com (hardhead.otw.com [206.97.113.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id KAA13920 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MyShadow.dtor.com (root@modem7.otw.com [206.97.113.17]) by hardhead.otw.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA08243; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:55:48 GMT
Received: from MyShadow.dtor.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by MyShadow.dtor.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA01097;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 12:14:27 -0400
Message-Id: <199710021614.MAA01097@MyShadow.dtor.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 05/05/96
To: tekjobs@themall.net
cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 02 Oct 1997 11:06:30 -0000."
<199710021509.IAA19696@italy.it.earthlink.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 12:14:27 -0400
From: Hal Wine
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
"Ray Osborne" () wrote:
>How does list software handle bounces ? Just deletes the bounce
>warning as it comes back or actually remove the email address from
>the master list ? If it removes email addresses of bounced mail then
>there must be some code that it is using to do this. If it just
>deletes the warning then I do that anyway by filling up a mail folder
>with bounced mail and dumping it now and then.
Usually, the behaviour is configurable. I set the number of bounces
within a time period to determine when it deletes the email address. I
need not see any of the bounce messages.
And, yes, there is code, but it's somewhat heuristic to catch all the
variations. And, mostly they're programmed in something that has very
strong regular expression capability (e.g. Perl or Procmail), which I
doubt Pegasis has.
>This makes me think if there is no standard just convention then it
>will make it difficult for any software to actually remove email
>addresses of bounced mail. And if there is all this email out there
>just bouncing around will it not be slowing down the Internet to some
>degree ?
No, there's not a lot of email bouncing, because most folks keep their
lists clean. If you're not keeping your list clean, then you're
contributing to excessive bounce messages.
>This is how I overcame this list. But that list is not as crucial as
>my Computer Professionals lists and I wanted a better technology way
>to solve this problem
Then get list software.
--
Hal Wine DTOR Consulting
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 12:17:40 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id LAA27559; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:42:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from quilla.tezcat.com (quilla.tezcat.com [204.128.247.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id LAA27467 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [206.230.56.44] (adamb.tezcat.com [206.230.56.44])
by quilla.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id NAA03760
for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 13:42:09 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199710021842.NAA03760@quilla.tezcat.com>
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 97 13:42:52 -0500
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v2, June 6, 1997
From: Adam Bailey
To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On 9/30/97 4:42 PM CDT, Ray Osborne wrote...
>I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
>returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
>I am unaware of. At the moment I am employing a work at home secretary
>to keep my databases of email addresses fined tuned.
Most sites comply with the standard for bounce messages, which is
contained in an RFC somewhere (I don't have the number handy).
Some, of course, do not. Those are the ones that are typically more
difficult to deal with.
>What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
>are no longer useful ?
An actual mailing list management package. :)
Also, I hear that some people like SmartBounce
, though I haven't tried it myself.
--
Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| "Do not take life too seriously;
adamb@tezcat.com | you will never get out of it alive."
adamkb@aol.com | - Elbert Hubbard
Finger for PGP | http://www.tezcat.com/~adamb
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 13:20:55 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id LAA29177; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id LAA29159 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA20398; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710021854.LAA20398@shell7.ba.best.com>
From: Cyndi Norman
To: amys@amys-answers.com
CC: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@shell7.ba.best.com
In-reply-to: <199709291247.FAA02161@honor.greatcircle.com>
(amys@amys-answers.com)
Subject: Re: Juno Problems[via LSMTP - see www.lsoft.com]
Reply-to: cnorman@best.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
From: "Amy Stinson"
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:38:35 +0000
I am now cleaning up hundreds of bounces. All of my list members at
Juno are being returned as unknown. This started happening
yesterday with *some* of them, but now all of them are being
returned. Is anyone else experiencing this?
How very odd... Unfortunately, my ISP's list software won't let me see
bounces (it's very annoying) so I checked the roundabout way. I just got
an up to date copy of hte list subs and my 7 juno subscribers all look fine
(there are #'s in front of the names that tell you if they've been
bouncing). No juno subscriber has been removed from the list for bouncing
(4 days in a row).
Of course, it may not have hit me yet...
Cyndi
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman
something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com
__________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 13:36:15 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id LAA26060; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell7.ba.best.com (shell7.ba.best.com [206.184.139.138]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id LAA26015 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA13946; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710021831.LAA13946@shell7.ba.best.com>
From: Cyndi Norman
To: delundel@netguide.com
CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@shell7.ba.best.com
In-reply-to: <3432EA2B.71B8@netguide.com> (message from David Lundell on Wed,
01 Oct 1997 17:26:19 -0700)
Subject: Re: Subscription Verification
Reply-to: cnorman@best.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:26:19 -0700
From: David Lundell
First and foremost, do you feel, from an ethical standpoint, that
mailing list administrators should always verify a user before
subscribing that user?
No. There are a lot of pluses to verification but I don't think it's the
list admin's moral duty to do it.
I'd also love to hear your thoughts on whether, legally, the victim of
such an attack has grounds for recourse against a list provider.
Probably about the same recource someone has against a magazine owner after
being the victim of an attack where someone else filled in 100 magazine
subscription cards without their knowledge. Though I'm just guessing.
Also, does anyone verify unsubscribes too? If so, what are the merits of
that?
I've thought about it. I only know of one time where the wrong person was
unsubscribed. Some jerk unsubbed *me* from my own list. But people
already have so much trouble unsubbing (and the motivation to keep trying
is very very different from people wanting to join a list) that I won't do
it unless unsubbing others becomes a huge problem.
Lastly, if any of you have switched from no verification at all to some
type of verification, did you notice a slow-down in the growth of your
lists?
Well I went from a manuelly run list on one ISP to an auto one with
verification on another. I had some level of ver on the old list since I
wouldn't sub people from third party addresses. But, no, there is no
difference.
Verifying subs has been a godsend and I highly recommend it for most lists,
especially large publically available ones. I went from a handful a month
to zero in almost a year accusations of subbing people to the list without
their permission. I don't get as many angry unsubs (though there are a
few) but that's also because I give minimal help to new subscribers since
if I help them too much they will inevidibly post to the list and whine to
be unsubbed too (this happened to me with someone who was on the list less
than a month and I had made promise he wouldn't do that if I subbed him
myself).
Yes, I do get a larger workload since some people have trouble with the
verfication process, but far more people have trouble with the sub
software, despite my detailed directions.
Also, now I have had only 2 spams on the entire list ever since moving
(from the same person, someone from my ISP who subbed then posted the same
ad twice before I was able to catch it and boot him). The feature that
disallows posts from non-subscribers is the key here I think, but the
verification feature is an extra safeguard against spammers who send out
mass subs before sending mass spams.
Cyndi
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman
something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com
__________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 13:46:40 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id LAA28562; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sportsurf.net (sportsurf.net [192.41.36.58]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id LAA28383 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:47:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.204.56.156] (sss.pittsburgh.net [192.204.56.156]) by sportsurf.net (8.8.5) id MAA11112; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 12:48:10 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199710021848.MAA11112@sportsurf.net>
X-Authentication-Warning: sportsurf.net: Host sss.pittsburgh.net [192.204.56.156] claimed to be [192.204.56.156]
Subject: Fwd: Re: distinction among: owner, monitor and moderator
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 97 14:57:35 -0000
x-sender: mark@sportsurf.net
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Mark Rauterkus
To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Re: distinction among: owner, monitor and moderator
That seems to trip on Taboo too.
Hi Folks,
I was CCed a message, and a rather elegant one it is, IMHO. However, when
the original author sent it into the list -- it didn't appear. This is
the fourth attempt to get this message to you all -- as we are seeming
running into a "TABOO" problem.
Perhaps this fellow's email or else his domain name is on the list's
taboo set-up? With this message, I've zapped all statements of his
company affiliation. This message should go out to all to see now.
IMHO, this message isn't spam and is 100% on target. As for the taboo
things -- well, that isn't my call. I don't know this guy, nor do I know
the folks who run this list. But, I do know that this was a fine bit of
knowledge that was sent to the list that seems to not want to get out to
the subscribers.
The snagged snip follows ----
> >For the purposes of this research, we are making a distinction among the
> >following roles: list owner, list monitor and list moderator.
With *y***, we decided to break up the responsibilites and came up with
the
following different security roles:
* server admin: has rights to all lists on the server, can do anything
using the web interface or email commands. Doesn't receive any mail
from
any list. Receives software update notifications from us.
* site admin: has rights over all the lists in their "site" (ie: a
grouping
of lists), similar responsibilities as a server admin. Can change
virtual site settings (such as hostname, look & feel, etc).
* list admin: can add/delete members, moderate, change FAQs, action
phrases, autoresponders & change all list settings. Has no rights to
anything but their own list.
Members can also have any of the following extra rights, which are single
yes/no parameters:
* moderator: receives moderated message notifications, and can approve
them
* owner: receives mail sent to the owner-listname@... address
* error mail receiver: has opted to receive notifications of error mail
that Lyris has processed
* announcer: can send messages to the list, no matter what the
moderation
settings are
* poster: is allowed to send contributions when a list is set to reject
non-posters (for example, a magazine with an author pool might use
this)
This works pretty well for us. However, we do get a lot of requests for a
more limited list admin role, where the server administrator could remove
specific functions from the list admin's menu. Usually, the server
administrator fears that the admin is a danger to themselves, and will
tinker
with the wrong things, thus screwing up their own list (mucking with the
open/closed/private/password security setting, for instance)
> To take this one step further, I'm not even happy with the term, "LIST." The
> LIST term is one that is getting old, IMHO, but should get dropped in the
> next round of changes.
Agreed. Several years ago, when we used to sell another product (a
windows front
end to another product) we called them "Email Discussion Groups".
However, the term
"Discussion Groups" has now been coopted by the Newsgroup folks (that's
what
DjaNws(sic) calls them). And besides, "Discussion Groups" doesn't do
justice to
announcement lists and moderated-edit lists, which in many cases is what
people are more familiar with.
Nowadays, we simply call them "email lists" and say that there are several
kinds of "email lists", such as "owner-controlled announcement lists",
"moderated discussions", "moderated user-contributed announcements", and
"open
discussions". Recently, a new type has become popular, which we call
"DocBots", as in "Document Robots". Surveys, document repositories, and
other
"email databases" fall into this general category, where there is an
active
relationship between the user and the list server.
PS: I sent this message to the list several days ago, but it never was
distributed. If Majordomo suddenly decides to distribute one of the other
four older posts, our apologies for sending four copies.
John
some email address zapped
Some company name zapped
Developers of some other product name zapped too.
--- end of snarlled snip above ----
--------------
Mark Rauterkus, Publisher, S.S.S. http://www.sportsurf.net
mrauterkus@sportsurf.net http://www.SportSurf.Net/FootNotes
FootNotes: Mac E-book authoring and distribution environment with
built-in multi-media, lan, web, internet and e-mail capabilities.
--------------
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 17:30:12 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id PAA05304; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id PAA05085 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell7.ba.best.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.8.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-970426)
id PAA10804; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shell7.ba.best.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id PAA28458; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710022250.PAA28458@shell7.ba.best.com>
From: Cyndi Norman
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
CC: cnorman@shell7.ba.best.com
In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19970930213428.00d868e4@mail.idyllmtn.com> (message
from Kynn Bartlett on Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:34:28 -0700)
Subject: AOL contacts
Reply-to: cnorman@best.com
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:34:28 -0700
From: Kynn Bartlett
At 09:09 p.m. 09/30/97 -0700, Todd O. wrote:
>I have gotten the sense that contacting David O'Donnel is about the only
>way to get AOL to respond to valid complaints from internet users.
Huh. I'd think that such things would be annoying and distract
Mr. O'Donnell from his work, instead of helping.
Yes, you'd think so. I guess that's why he now has a staff instead of
answering all his own mail.
Much the same way
as I'd be annoyed if someone started writing to my personal email
address or telephoning me, instead of writing to my majordomo's
majordomo@Mlists.com address or the owner- address.
Agreed on general principle but see below.
Maybe I'm just weird like that. If David has specifically said to
contact him directly instead of writing to abuse@aol.com, then hey,
it's his choice. (If he hasn't, though, you're probably out of
line in suggesting that as the best way to resolve your problems.)
AOL gives the atropos@aol.net address out on their auto-return mail for all
mail sent to postmaster and/or abuse. I forget exactly what they say to
use it for, but they do say it's okay to use it (I think it's the usenet
problems contact?). atropos is not David's personal email account.
David is the person who contacted me when I wrote AOL several years ago
about setting up a news echo. When I was having trouble with the 3 twits
on my list who were harressing one of my subscribers (and the regular
channels weren't fast enough for me), I wrote him (not even knowing he was
the postmaster). He took immediate action and told me to write him if I
ever had any other problems. Shortly after that I asked him to clarify:
should I write him with all AOL user problems, or just the serious/timely
ones? He said only for the latter.
I think it's unfortunate (for David and his staff in particular) that AOL
runs things such that you have to write the actual postmaster to get
replies to your questions. Now, even if they don't get back to you, AOL is
great about removing the accounts of spammers when you report them to
postmaster or abuse. It's the techincal problems I have trouble getting
answers to and I write atropos as a last resort.
BUT for serious problems such as harressment and threats of bodily harm, I
do think it's appropriate to write the top dog who can take care of it.
David is that person. Of course, you have to be careful what you label
serious...when too many people overdo it, it makes it harder for the rest
of us with the true emergencies.
Cyndi
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman
something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com
__________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 2 17:39:56 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id PAA26516; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (cu.nih.gov [128.231.160.111]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id PAA26472 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710022206.PAA26472@honor.greatcircle.com>
To: adamb@tezcat.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: "Roger Fajman"
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 18:07:11 EDT
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> Most sites comply with the standard for bounce messages, which is
> contained in an RFC somewhere (I don't have the number handy).
RFCs 1891-4. However, I think it's a stretch to say that most sites
comply. Recent versions of Unix sendmail do. But there are lots
of other things out there that generate bounces in their own formats.
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 03:45:13 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id DAA25127; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 03:34:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rampart.mincom.com (rampart.mincom.com [203.15.57.34]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id XAA02763 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 23:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by rampart.mincom.com (8.8.3/8.7.3) id QAA30321 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:39:19 +1000
Received: from portal.mincom.oz.au(192.55.181.11) by blocker via smap (V2.0)
id xma030318; Fri, 3 Oct 97 16:39:13 +1000
Received: from deimos.mincom.oz.au (deimos [192.55.198.248])
by portal.mincom.oz.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA29002
for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:39:10 +1000
Received: (from philh@localhost) by deimos.mincom.oz.au (8.8.4/8.7.3) id QAA08848 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:39:07 +1000 (EST)
From: Phil Homewood
Message-Id: <199710030639.QAA08848@deimos.mincom.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Today's award for "Most Obfuscated Bounce Message"
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:39:07 +1000 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <199710030030.RAA25702@honor.greatcircle.com> from "List-Managers-Digest" at Oct 2, 97 05:30:22 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 PGP6]
Content-Type: text
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> Sort of reminds me of the following sub announcement majordomo sent me
> earlier this summer...
>
> PTS#u#CBH#u#D#c#PTS#u#CBH#u#D.PTS#u#CBH#u#P#c#DelaiR@health.qld.gov.au
>
> That's one helluva long address. I'd hate to type it in everytime. I
> verified it with the person who had it. She's a helth official in, if I
> remember right, Queensgate, Australia. In any event, the postmaster down
> there apparantly dishes these out to everyone. Shortly after this was
> received, I received a note from the person indicating it would change to a
> most human readably style.
Queensland, not Queensgate. And yes, they have moved to something
more humanly readable. Pity that a given address is not guaranteed
to remain constantly unambiguous (for example, Joe Smith might be
smithj@health.blah, but if Jane Smith then gets an account, yup,
smithj (user is ambiguous)
I know not what the MTA is. I don't want to know. All I know is that
we have a lot of employees contacting to Qld Health, and trying to
keep their aliases in order hurts badly. They also have no postmaster@.
P.
--
Phil Homewood email: philh@mincom.com
Postmaster/Hostmaster/Webmaster
Mincom Pty Ltd phone: +61-7-3364-9715
Brisbane, QLD Australia fax: +61-7-3364-9910
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 08:46:11 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id IAA02366; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 08:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zipcode.atg.aol.com (zipcode.atg.aol.com [152.163.8.52]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA02322 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 08:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (zhou@localhost) by zipcode.atg.aol.com with SMTP (8.7.1/8.7.3) id LAA27949; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:26:57 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: zipcode.atg.aol.com: zhou owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:26:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Yingying Zhou
X-Sender: zhou@zipcode.atg.aol.com
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
cc: "David O'Donnell"
Subject: Re: AOL contacts (fwd)
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I'm forwarding this message for Daivd O'Donnell since he is not on this
list. Feel free to email him if you have any questions with this message.
Yingying
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:18:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: PMDAtropos@aol.com
To: zhou@aol.net
Subject: Re: AOL contacts (fwd)
> Yes, you'd think so. I guess that's why he now has a staff instead of
> answering all his own mail.
>
> Much the same way
> as I'd be annoyed if someone started writing to my personal email
> address or telephoning me, instead of writing to my majordomo's
> majordomo@Mlists.com address or the owner- address.
>
> Agreed on general principle but see below.
>
> Maybe I'm just weird like that. If David has specifically said to
> contact him directly instead of writing to abuse@aol.com, then hey,
> it's his choice. (If he hasn't, though, you're probably out of
> line in suggesting that as the best way to resolve your problems.)
Yingying Zhou kindly forwarded this message on to me, so please make sure to
send replies to PMDAtropos@aol.com and not her.
I'm concerned that people are note seeing resolution when they mail
complaints to postmaster@aol.com or abuse@aol.net (yes, we prefer
abuse@aol.net although abuse@aol.com *will* work).
The reason my address (actually, now David Jackson's address -
djackson@aol.net) was included on the postmaster/abuse auto-response was for
people who've reported abuse and seen no change in its flow to contact me;
and to provide an *emergency* contact point in the event you're seeing
egregious immediate and damaging abuse, like a mailbomb. It wasn't to say
"hey, don't send mail to abuse or postmaster, send it to me instead." Believe
me, between the mail I get for work, the anti-junk mail list I'm on and the
gazillions of bogus complaints about junk mail with forged AOL.COM headers, I
get *plenty* of mail every day. So much so that I routinely have five to six
hundred pieces in my mailboxes.
Unfortunately, I don't know the whole context of this message thread, but I
hope the following addresses will help people who have questions or problems
with AOL:
For problems with networking issues (DNS resolution, connectivity, etc) send
mail to
trouble@aol.net
^^^ note the NET, not COM!
For problems with junk mail or USENET abuse by an AOL member (and after
you've looked at the headers to make sure it's REALLY an AOL member) send
mail to:
abuse@aol.net
abuse@aol.com
postmaster@aol.com
in that order of preference
For junk mail you receive with forged AOL.COM headers send mail to:
aollegal@aol.com
^^ note there are two lowercase "L"s here
For IRC problems send mail to:
tosirc@aol.com
For routine questions about AOL send mail to:
postmaster@aol.com
If it's an emergency (mailbombing or similar realtime issue) send mail to:
pmdatropos@aol.com
atropos@aol.net
right now, best to send to both addresses; I have better access to
pmdatropos than atropos.
If you're in a REALLY SERIOUS EMERGENCY, like a DOS attack by an AOL member,
and you are *certain* it is an AOL member, page me at 1 800/SKY-PAGE pin
128-5338. Then call the AOL Network Operations Center at 703/453-5862. The
NOC is staffed 24x7, whereas I occasionally require a little sleep.
--David O'Donnell
Director, AOL Internet Development Outreach & Technology
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 12:15:08 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id MAA09997; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell.wco.com (shell.wco.com [199.4.94.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id MAA09845 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from User.wco.com (rock29.wco.com [199.4.109.129])
by shell.wco.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/WCO-18jul97) with SMTP id MAA20758;
Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971003121110.008e1c80@mail.wco.com>
X-Sender: 2bits@mail.wco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
X-Priority: 1 (Highest)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:11:10 -0700
To: "David O'Donnell"
From: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
Subject: Ongoing harrassment and mail bombing: dotmorriso
Cc: atropos@aol.net, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
David O'Donnel wrote:
>I'm concerned that people are note seeing resolution when they mail
>complaints to postmaster@aol.com or abuse@aol.net (yes, we prefer
>abuse@aol.net although abuse@aol.com *will* work).
Well, that makes two of us. Now, I'd like some action to go along with the
concern. There has been serious abuse issued by your dotmorriso@aol.com
account for over a month, now. Please correct this situation immediately.
Details follow.
On Saturday, August 30, several thousand subscribers to mountain biking
lists, including four that I run, received unsolicited e-mail written by
Mike Vandeman and sent from the account dotmorriso@aol.com. (You cancelled
Mike Vandeman's Mjvvv account in in Feb. 1996 when I called you on the
phone while he was in the process of crashing the server my lists run on.
See http://www.keck.ucsf.edu/~dblake/vand.html for details.) The mail was
sent directly to the subscribers' addresses, not to the 20 or so lists from
which the addresses were harvested. Apparently one message was sent for
each letter of the alphabet and copied to all addresses beginning with that
letter.
Here on the heasers and beginning of one of those posts:
/* begin original message */
Return-path:
Envelope-to: jborg@xmission.com
Delivery-date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 03:41:39 -0600
Received: from emout05.mail.aol.com [198.81.11.96]
by mail.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 1.62 #4)
id 0x4k2D-0007Cq-00; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 03:41:37 -0600
Received: (from root@localhost)
by emout05.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
id FAA15282;
Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:34:40 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 05:34:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dotmorriso@aol.com
Message-ID: <970830053439_1059583460@emout05.mail.aol.com>
Subject: The Effects of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People
Bcc:
X-UIDL: b9de07cabb605077cd930224349c018c
X-PMFLAGS: 34603136 0
I would like to create a mailing list for serious discussions of the
impacts of mountain biking on wildlife and people. Please reply with
"remove" as the subject or message if you do not want to receive such
information, such as the following:
[about 22K of diatribe deleted]
/* end original message */
Many people sent complaints to you postmaster and abuse addresses during
that episode, and continued to send them through at least September 5 I am
told.
On September 17, dotmorriso@aol.com struck again, this time on six or seven
usenet newsgroups, including sci.environment, ca.environment,
rec.backcountry, rec.bicycles.off-road, alt.mountain-bike, and
rec.animals.wildlife, which is ported to another e-mail list that has been
disrupted and intruded upon by Mike Vandeman over the years. The huge,
three part message was posted individually to each newgroup, maximizing the
waste of bandwidth and setting off flame wars that were widely cross-posted
for weeks.
The content of the message contained instructions to spam the thousands of
subscribers to mountain biking lists at cycling.org, a list of the 32 lists
from which addresses had been harvested, instructions to subscribe to those
lists and disrupt them, and the addresses of thousands of subscribers with
instructions to send them unwanted and unsolicited e-mail.
It also contained instructions to call up the employers of any of those
subscribers who seem to be using their work accounts to subscribe to the
lists and complain to their employers about the alleged abuse of company
assets. Yesterday, the employer of two subscribers working at Charles
Scwab were contacted by Mike Vandeman who claimed to be a big and important
Scwab customer while he lodged just such a complaint.
Here are the message headers from one of the usenet messages I am
describing:
/* begin original message */
From: dotmorriso@aol.com (Dotmorriso)
Newsgroups: rec.animals.wildlife
Subject: How to Communicate with Mountain Bikers (Part 1)
Date: 17 Sep 1997 09:56:52 GMT
Lines: 1195
Message-ID: <19970917095600.FAA18804@ladder02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
SnewsLanguage: English
[over 1100 lines of instructions and e-mail addresses deleted]
/* end original message */
Parts two and three of those messages consisted entirely of e-mail
addresses of list subscribers.
Again, complaints were sent to your postmaster and abuse addresses.
Apparently nothing was done, or has been done because this morning,
dotmorriso@aol.com is on the attack again. Beginning last night and
continuing on into this morning, the same list of cycling.org subscribers
has been receiving unsolicited and unwanted e-mail written by Mike
Vandeman. I haven't been hit myself, because Vandeman knows better than to
tip me off, but I have seen complaints flowing into my lists and others.
David, please put an end to this, and let me know that it has been put to
and end so that I can reassure my subscribers that they won't be bothered
by dotmorriso@aol.com any longer. I am losing subscribers because of this
ongoing abuse, my list and my personal account are showing a marked
increase in spam since the posts to usenet, and I still have the sense that
AOL isn't doing a damn thing about it.
Please note that I am sending this to the list-managers list by way of
explanantion of my earlier post ther explaining that I don't get the sense
that AOL really takes care of matters such as these until you get involved.
Please feel free to issue an explanation for the list. I will be happy to
forward it for you if necessary.
Thanks,
Todd Ourston
--
Todd Ourston * 2bits@wco.com * Marin County, California
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 15:45:50 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id PAA16811; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ayla.idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id PAA16750 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grev.idyllmtn.com (grev.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.108])
by ayla.idyllmtn.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02426;
Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971003153509.00e80414@mail.idyllmtn.com>
X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 15:35:09 -0700
To: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
From: Kynn Bartlett
Subject: Re: Ongoing harrassment and mail bombing: dotmorriso
Cc: "David O'Donnell" , atropos@aol.net,
List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971003121110.008e1c80@mail.wco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 12:11 p.m. 10/03/97 -0700, Todd O. wrote:
>Please note that I am sending this to the list-managers list by way of
>explanantion of my earlier post ther explaining that I don't get the sense
>that AOL really takes care of matters such as these until you get involved.
> Please feel free to issue an explanation for the list. I will be happy to
>forward it for you if necessary.
I personally don't care about any specific incidents and what's
done in them; please _don't_ bring your personal difficulties
onto this list.
It's one thing for us to discuss the best way to handle problems
with bad netizens, at AOL and elsewhere, but it's another thing
to be dragged into the middle of your ongoing problems with
anyone.
--
/\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com
/ \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet
/ \ //\ /\ \ / \
'_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Virtual Dog Show is open! www.dogshow.com
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 16:15:08 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA25143; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell.wco.com (shell.wco.com [199.4.94.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id QAA24954 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:08:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from User.wco.com (clavius19.wco.com [199.4.109.19])
by shell.wco.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/WCO-18jul97) with SMTP id QAA08220;
Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:09:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971003160934.007cf960@mail.wco.com>
X-Sender: 2bits@mail.wco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:09:34 -0700
To: Kynn Bartlett
From: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
Subject: Re: Ongoing harrassment and mail bombing: dotmorriso
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19971003153509.00e80414@mail.idyllmtn.com>
References: <3.0.3.32.19971003121110.008e1c80@mail.wco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 03:35 PM 10/3/97 -0700, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>I personally don't care about any specific incidents and what's
>done in them; please _don't_ bring your personal difficulties
>onto this list.
As I explained in the portion of my message you quoted, I copied my mail to
the list as an example of the lack of response I (and others) have received
from AOL's abuse and postmaster addresses. My message was a reply to a
message sent to the list on behalf of David O'Donnell. O'Donnell's message
was sent because there still seems to be some interest and doubt about how
to contact AOL and what to expect. I invited David O'Donnell to follow up
with us here so that we can get to the bottom of this. I think that is in
keeping with what you had in mind:
>It's one thing for us to discuss the best way to handle problems
>with bad netizens, at AOL and elsewhere, but it's another thing
>to be dragged into the middle of your ongoing problems with
>anyone.
Once again, no one has been dragged anywhere. The focus of my message was
not in the individuals involved, but the ongoing abuse and complaints to
which AOL has not responded in any meaningful way. That is on topic. Your
personal problems with me or others are not. If you or anyone else on the
list has personal problems with me, please keep them personal. If you want
a flame war, I'll let you know when I have time. In particuar, do take
care not to send your personal complaints to AOL's priority complaint
addresses when the person you are complaining about is not an AOL customer.
Todd Ourston
Not an AOL customer
--
Todd Ourston * 2bits@wco.com * Marin County, California
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 16:45:45 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA28986; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from public.lists.apple.com (public.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id QAA28926 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:25:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.219.12.99] (A17-219-12-99.apple.com [17.219.12.99])
by public.lists.apple.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA19804
; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:26:31 -0700
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971003121110.008e1c80@mail.wco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:24:18 -0700
To: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>, "David O'Donnell"
From: Chuq Von Rospach
Subject: Re: Ongoing harrassment and mail bombing: dotmorriso
Cc: atropos@aol.net, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 12:11 PM -0700 10/3/97, Todd O. wrote:
>Apparently one message was sent for
>each letter of the alphabet and copied to all addresses beginning with that
>letter.
Which is, of course, why "who/who" is turned off on my servers for all
users, until I can write a more secure one. I ran into this one by
accident myself, when a user with a single letter account wrote me and
warned me. Ugh.
--
Chuq Von Rospach (chuq@apple.com) Apple IS&T Mail List Gnome
Plaidworks Consulting (chuqui@plaidworks.com)
( +-+ The home for Hockey on the net)
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 17:00:31 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA05917; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell.wco.com (shell.wco.com [199.4.94.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id QAA05828 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from User.wco.com (rock35.wco.com [199.4.109.135])
by shell.wco.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/WCO-18jul97) with SMTP id QAA22989;
Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971003165217.00806650@mail.wco.com>
X-Sender: 2bits@mail.wco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:52:17 -0700
To: Chuq Von Rospach
From: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
Subject: Re: Ongoing harrassment and mail bombing: dotmorriso
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To:
References: <3.0.3.32.19971003121110.008e1c80@mail.wco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
[Cc: to AOL emergency addresses trimmed]
At 04:24 PM 10/3/97 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>Which is, of course, why "who/who" is turned off on my servers for all
>users, until I can write a more secure one. I ran into this one by
>accident myself, when a user with a single letter account wrote me and
>warned me. Ugh.
I've asked the owner/operator of our server to disable that feature. No
response from him so far. I think it is a good idea, though.
Back to the differences in stories about AOL's responsiveness, I think it
may be that AOL is well drilled in cancelling accounts for UCE abuses, but
they just don't know what to make of the sort of stories I have described.
Does anyone else have some insights that may illuminate that perspective?
Todd Ourston
--
Todd Ourston * 2bits@wco.com * Marin County, California
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 3 18:00:31 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id RAA16575; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 17:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id RAA16546 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 17:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from dfl@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.7/PanixU1.3) id UAA28892 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:45:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Danny Lieberman
Message-Id: <199710040045.UAA28892@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Ongoing harrassment (etc)
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (List Managers)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:45:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
(quoting Todd O)
> Back to the differences in stories about AOL's responsiveness, I think it
> may be that AOL is well drilled in cancelling accounts for UCE abuses, but
> they just don't know what to make of the sort of stories I have described.
> Does anyone else have some insights that may illuminate that perspective?
Only that Vandeman is an example of the other sort of spamster: a ZEALOT
who believes that they are posessed of a spiel that they must share with
everyone they come in contact with.
I just finished dealing with a similar case (if you're interested I'll
email you privately) who insisted on attacking my ISP because they were
"the enemy" since they gave ACTUP free access, whereas he was kicked off
(he didnt bother saying it was for newsgroup spam).
I'm not about to ask AOL to take action against this one, tho.
--
Danny Lieberman
dfl@panix.com
From owner-list-managers-list Sat Oct 4 17:45:41 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id RAA15868; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sparknet.net (mail.sparknet.net [207.67.22.80]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id RAA15851 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from freedom.sparknet.net (chris-1800.sparknet.net [207.67.22.43]) by mail.sparknet.net (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA20007 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:38:49 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19971004193636.00aae4d0@mail.sparknet.net>
X-Sender: knight@mail.sparknet.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 19:36:38 -0500
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Christopher Knight
Subject: Re: Predicting e-mail traffic
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 11:34 AM 9/27/97 -0700, Sam Brooks wrote:
>Have there been any studies to predict the amount of traffic
>a discussion list will generate, based on the number of subscribers?
>
>e.g. will 1,000 listmembers generate 150 posts per day,
> sort of thing.
>Thanks in advance
>Sam
We thought we'd give a little $8/month for less than 25 members small
list hosting service.....
After the final stats were in for September, they moved 56,768 Emails
through their list. (this particular one was christian priest discussion).
That blew our expectations by about 50,000 Emails.
So, until you get a sample after 30 days of list traffic,
you really don't know.
Cheers!
Christopher Knight
http://SparkLIST.com/
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 16:30:57 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA02896; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA02853 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA02884 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from germany.it.earthlink.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.8.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-970426)
id IAA17356; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (ip72.an4-atlanta2.ga.pub-ip.psi.net [38.6.4.72])
by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA18891
for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710011554.IAA18891@germany.it.earthlink.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Ray Osborne"
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 11:50:42 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Reply-to: tekjobs@themall.net
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Sorry if this is the second time you received this but I didn't get a
copy so I doubt it got out.
Hi,
I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
features of Pegasus. Pegasus has some good filtering characterisitics
but I have been unable to write a script to remove the email
addresses of bounced email from a list.
I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
I am unaware of. At the moment I am employing a work at home secretary
to keep my databases of email addresses fined tuned.
What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
are no longer useful ? If you discussed this already then I would
appreciate somebody telling me what date so I can find the archive.
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 16:35:39 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA02781; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA02771 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.teleport.com (mail1.teleport.com [192.108.254.26]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id HAA13176 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip-pdx05-29.teleport.com (ip-pdx05-29.teleport.com [206.163.123.158]) by mail1.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA10520 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19971001055953.1e27d10c@mail.teleport.com>
X-Sender: reedg@mail.teleport.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 05:59:53
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Reed Gleason
Subject: Shouldn't recipient's address be in headers?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Occasionally a s*bscriber will be receiving my list at one address, but
will try to post or uns*bscribe from a different address, and they won't
know what their subscribe address is. I tell them to look at all the
headers and find out who the list messages are being sent to, but now I
notice that, for my lists, the recipient isn't shown, at least not if
you're using Eudora and click on "blah,blah,blah". Shouldn't lists be
configured so the address the messages are sent to is in the headers?
Some lists do... Listmom does:
Return-Path: ListMom-Talk@SkyList.Net
Received: from relay4.smtp.psi.net (relay4.smtp.psi.net [38.9.52.2]) by
desiree.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA01271 for
; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 20:41:51 -0700 (PDT).....
But List-managers doesn't:
Return-Path: owner-list-managers-digest-outgoing@GreatCircle.COM
Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by
portia.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA03871; Mon, 8 Sep 1997
01:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from honor.greatcircle.com by relay5.UU.NET with ESMTP
Seems most Majordomo lists don't, but some do.
What should I tell my s*bscriber who gets the list, but can't post because
they're "not a s*bscriber"?
--
Reed Gleason; Reedg@teleport.com; Portland, OR. 503-283-1366
List"owner"(yeah, right) of goatslite@lists.teleport.com
CAPER DIEM! ("play with your goats all day")
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 16:40:11 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA02861; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA02808 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:24:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from luna2.shelby.com (luna.shelby.com [207.105.6.145]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id JAA05259 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 09:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kuno (kuno [207.105.6.156]) by luna2.shelby.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA10408; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:21:31 -0700
Message-Id: <199710021621.JAA10408@luna2.shelby.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "John Buckman"
Organization: Walter Shelby Group Ltd.
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 09:02:43 -0800
Subject: Re: distinction among: owner, monitor and moderator
CC: Mark Rauterkus
In-reply-to: <199709261806.MAA15560@sportsurf.net>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> >For the purposes of this research, we are making a distinction among the
> >following roles: list owner, list monitor and list moderator.
With Lyris, we decided to break up the responsibilites and came up with the
following different security roles:
* server admin: has rights to all lists on the server, can do anything
using the web interface or email commands. Doesn't receive any mail from
any list. Receives software update notifications from us.
* site admin: has rights over all the lists in their "site" (ie: a grouping
of lists), similar responsibilities as a server admin. Can change
virtual site settings (such as hostname, look & feel, etc).
* list admin: can add/delete members, moderate, change FAQs, action
phrases, autoresponders & change all list settings. Has no rights to
anything but their own list.
Members can also have any of the following extra rights, which are single
yes/no parameters:
* moderator: receives moderated message notifications, and can approve them
* owner: receives mail sent to the owner-listname@... address
* error mail receiver: has opted to receive notifications of error mail
that Lyris has processed
* announcer: can send messages to the list, no matter what the moderation
settings are
* poster: is allowed to send contributions when a list is set to reject
non-posters (for example, a magazine with an author pool might use this)
This works pretty well for us. However, we do get a lot of requests for a
more limited list admin role, where the server administrator could remove
specific functions from the list admin's menu. Usually, the server
administrator fears that the admin is a danger to themselves, and will tinker
with the wrong things, thus screwing up their own list (mucking with the
open/closed/private/password security setting, for instance)
> To take this one step further, I'm not even happy with the term, "LIST." The
> LIST term is one that is getting old, IMHO, but should get dropped in the
> next round of changes.
Agreed. Several years ago, when we used to sell InfoMagnet (a windows front
end to LISTSERV) we called them "Email Discussion Groups". However, the term
"Discussion Groups" has now been coopted by the Newsgroup folks (that's what
DejaNews calls them). And besides, "Discussion Groups" doesn't do justice to
announcement lists and moderated-edit lists, which in many cases is what
people are more familiar with.
Nowadays, we simply call them "email lists" and say that there are several
kinds of "email lists", such as "owner-controlled announcement lists",
"moderated discussions", "moderated user-contributed announcements", and "open
discussions". Recently, a new type has become popular, which we call
"DocBots", as in "Document Robots". Surveys, document repositories, and other
"email databases" fall into this general category, where there is an active
relationship between the user and the list server.
PS: I sent this message to the list several days ago, but it never was
distributed. If Majordomo suddenly decides to distribute my week-old post,
my apologies for sending two copies.
John
John Buckman
Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com
Developers of Lyris Email List Server
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 16:46:29 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA03857; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA03801 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from germany.it.earthlink.net (germany-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.123]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id JAA07241 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (ip242.an3-atlanta2.ga.pub-ip.psi.net [38.6.3.242])
by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA12574
for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710021615.JAA12574@germany.it.earthlink.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Ray Osborne"
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 12:12:32 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Web hosting for List Owners/Managers
Reply-to: tekjobs@themall.net
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Hello All,
Now this is the area I would like to research and do some shopping
on. Does any list owners/managers have a Web hosting service they
are particulary happy with ?
I am shopping for one. What would a list owner/manager want with
a good Web hosting service ?
Multiple Auto Responders comes to mind. Multiple email alias for
filtering purposes. Good track history of being on line
100 per cent. Professionalism is important as I deal with a lot of corporate
clients.
Anybody else have a wish list that they would impose on a good
Web hosting service ? Seems like there is a million out there. Anybody
have a Web host they would recommend for a multiple-list owner ?
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 16:50:10 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA03706; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA03688 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from italy.it.earthlink.net (italy-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.18]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA26808 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 08:08:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (ip204.an3-atlanta2.ga.pub-ip.psi.net [38.6.3.204])
by italy.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA19696;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 08:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710021509.IAA19696@italy.it.earthlink.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Ray Osborne"
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:06:30 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Reply-to: tekjobs@themall.net
CC: Hal Wine
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Ray wrote:
>I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
>particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
>features of Pegasus.
Hal wrote:
>That's why folks use list software -- bounce handling is a big problem to
>solve.
Ray Responded:
How does list software handle bounces ? Just deletes the bounce
warning as it comes back or actually remove the email address from
the master list ? If it removes email addresses of bounced mail then
there must be some code that it is using to do this. If it just
deletes the warning then I do that anyway by filling up a mail folder
with bounced mail and dumping it now and then.
>I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
>returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
>I am unaware of.
Hal >No standard, many conventions.
This makes me think if there is no standard just convention then it
will make it difficult for any software to actually remove email
addresses of bounced mail. And if there is all this email out there
just bouncing around will it not be slowing down the Internet to some
degree ?
Ray>What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
Ray>are no longer useful ?
Hal >My list software. If you have a large enough list to keep a secretary
Hal >busy, you need list software.
I dunno it's not a big problem as I retire my oldest mail lists and
tell my subscribers to resubscribe.
I just did this with my Human Resource Professionals list and it
worked quite well. I have a huge list of Human Resource professionals
of major corps around the US which I have been building for the past
two year. After this time I would end up with over 500 bounces so
I took the old list and told any active subscribers to resubscribe
into a new list.
This is how I overcame this list. But that list is not as crucial as
my Computer Professionals lists and I wanted a better technology way
to solve this problem
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 17:00:46 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA05783; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:45:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA05756 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.teleport.com (mail1.teleport.com [192.108.254.26]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id VAA11445 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip-pdx08-22.teleport.com (ip-pdx24-07.teleport.com [206.163.125.231]) by mail1.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA00881 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19971002215513.3cefaf72@mail.teleport.com>
X-Sender: reedg@mail.teleport.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 21:55:13
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Reed Gleason
Subject: Shouldn't recipient's address be in headers?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Occasionally a s*bscriber will be receiving my list at one address, but
will try to post or uns*bscribe from a different address, and they won't
know what their s*bscribe address is. I tell them to look at all the
headers and find out who the list messages are being sent to, but now I
notice that, for my lists, the recipient isn't shown, at least not if
you're using Eudora and click on "blah,blah,blah". Shouldn't lists be
configured so the address the messages are sent to is in the headers?
Some lists do... Listmom does:
Return-Path: ListMom-Talk@SkyList.Net
Received: from relay4.smtp.psi.net (relay4.smtp.psi.net [38.9.52.2]) by
desiree.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA01271 for
; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 20:41:51 -0700 (PDT).....
But List-managers doesn't:
Return-Path: owner-list-managers-digest-outgoing@GreatCircle.COM
Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by
portia.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA03871; Mon, 8 Sep 1997
01:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from honor.greatcircle.com by relay5.UU.NET with ESMTP
Seems most Majordomo lists don't, but some do.
What should I tell my s*bscriber who gets the list, but can't post because
they're "not a s*bscriber"?
--
Reed Gleason; Reedg@teleport.com; Portland, OR. 503-283-1366
List"owner"(yeah, right) of goatslite@lists.teleport.com
CAPER DIEM! ("play with your goats all day")
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 17:15:34 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA06922; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA06886 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id DAA27827 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from findel (bollow@findel [129.132.146.134]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id MAA19900; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:18:22 +0200
Received: (bollow@localhost) by findel (SMI-8.6/D-MATH-client) id MAA14230; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:18:21 +0200
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:18:21 +0200
Message-Id: <199710041018.MAA14230@findel>
From: Norbert Bollow
To: tekjobs@themall.net
CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-reply-to: <199710010146.SAA01571@germany.it.earthlink.net> (rko22@earthlink.net)
Subject: BOUNCEFILTER (Re: list mgmt tools (bounces))
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
> I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
> returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
There is a standard (defined in RFC1892 and RFC1894) but many MTA's out
there generate bounces which don't conform to the standard. It is not
trivial to handle them all automatically and reliably. Vince Sabio has
a program named SmartBounce which actually tries to parse all of those
weird formats, see http://www.bsabio.com/SmartBounce/
I have also written an automated bounce-handler, which is named Bouncefilter.
It uses a different (and in my opinion, much superior) strategy, see the
excerpt from the README below. Another advantage of Bouncefilter is that
it is fully and truly free software, you get the source code and you're
allowed to improve it and even redistribute it. The downside is that
Bouncefilter isn't available for so many platforms yet, in fact the only
version which is known to work reliably is the one for my own (heavily
hacked) version of Majordomo. I've also made an "alpha release" of a version
for Majordomo 1.94.x (it is available at
http://www.lists.oulu.fi/bh-workers/html/msg00040.html
and I had hoped that someone would do some testing and bug-fixing on it
so that it could be made generally available as a free bounce-handler
for Majordomo, but it seems that nothing has happened in that direction
yet. Actually it shouldn't be too hard to port Bouncefilter to very
different environments. Fell free to grab the alpha version mentioned
above and port it to your environment, or hire a consultant who'd do
that for you. In the long run I'm sure that'd be significantly cheaper
than your current approach, and in addition other will be able to profit
from this if you allow me to incorporate that port into future official
version of Bouncefilter. (If you have some patience I might even be willing
to port Bouncefilter for you for a relatively low fee, as soon as I've
finished that Ph.D. thesis which I'm trying hard to get finished before the
end of this year.)
> What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
> are no longer useful ? If you discussed this already then I would
> appreciate somebody telling me what date so I can find the archive.
You'll find some archived discussions at
http://www.lists.oulu.fi/bh-workers/html/maillist.html
May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you!
Norbert.
General information about BOUNCEFILTER:
If you are the list-owner for a Majordomo mailing list, you have probably
already received countless error messages when mail delivery to one or
more of the addresses on your list fails. There is a great variety of
different reasons why this can happen. For example, the recipient's mailbox
may be full (some system allow each user to store only a limited number of
e-mail messages) or the receiving host might be down or unreachable for a
period of time. Also, when an email account is closed, in many cases people
don't bother to unsubscribe from mailing lists first.
If the list-owner has to handle this flood of error messages manually, that
can be a small inconvenience or a lot of work, depending on how many
subscribers the list has.
BOUNCEFILTER is a computer program designed to remove this burden from the
shoulders of the list-owner, while at the same time giving the best possible
service to your subscribers. If an address starts generating error messages,
BOUNCEFILTER will try to send daily warning messages for a few days (in many
cases temporary failures of mail delivery are the fault of the ISP, or e-mail
provider, and the subscriber will probably not be informed that there were
such problems unless someone tells them). If an e-mail address continues to
generates error messages for more than four days, BOUNCEFILTER will unsubscribe
the address automatically and continue to send warnings for about a month.
The list-owners receive a daily summary of the activities of bouncefilter
(just one e-mail message per day). Depending on how Majordomo is set up, this
message may also contain information on other things, like when an address
is SUBSCRIBEd or UNSUBSCRIBEd.
Occasionally, someone will reply to the warnings from bouncefilter; such
replies are forwarded to the list-owners. Some people write to say that the
problem with their e-mail address has been fixed. In such cases you may want
to check if the adddress has been removed already, and in that case subscribe
the address again. Other people write something like "How do we go about
correcting this problem?" in response to the "Warning: It was not possible to
send you e-mail!" messages. In that case, you can simply write "Contact your
ISP, or e-mail provider. Possibly the problem has already been fixed."
Here is a brief (somewhat technical) description of how bouncefilter works:
My 'bouncefilter' script receives all messages to owner-$Listname\@myhost
and checks if they are delivery status notifications (DSNs). Those which
are not DSNs are forwarded to the list-owners. Those DSNs which conform to
RFC 1894 (which is a proposed internet standard for the format of DSNs)
are parsed and acted upon as follows: To those addresses which are marked
as "failed", bouncefilter sends a warning message which starts like this:
From: owner-$ListName\@$whereami
Subject: Warning: It was not possible to send you e-mail!
This is just a warning message to let you know that we got an error message
for your e-mail address. This means that you did not receive one or more
items of mail from the $ListName list, and possibly other, more personal
e-mail messages did not reach you either.
The warning messages also contains a copy of the human-readable part of
the DSN. To each of these addresses, these warning messages are repeated on a
daily basis unless no "failed" DSN arrives from that address. If after five
days there are still "failed" DSNs from that address, the address is
automatically unsubscribed. Bouncefilter still sends daily warning messages
(until one of them does not bounce with a "failed" DSN) for 25 more days
which start like this:
From: owner-$ListName\@$whereami
Subject: Warning: You're off the $ListName list now!
After we received error messages which indicated that it was not possible
to send e-mail to your address, your address was removed from the $ListName
list $Days. Unfortunately in such a situation it is normally not possible
to notify you of the problem, because e-mail will not reach you. What we do
in such a situation is that we try to send you a warning message like this
every day for a whole month until one of the messages gets through to you.
Since you read this, possibly the problem has gone away now, and you might
want to subscribe again to the $ListName list. You can do this by sending
the command
subscribe $ListName
in the body of an e-mail message To:
Needless to say, the list-owners receive a daily e-mail message with a log
of what is going on.
There are four special cases of which I haven't explained yet how my
bouncefilter treats them:
a) The (unfortunately still very frequent) case of DSNs which don't
conform to RFC1894.
b) The address (which is subscribed to a list) forwards
to an invalid address which might generate error
messages for which don't mention the subscribed
address at all.
c) Someone subscribed a local exploder to my list but goofed so that
the DSNs go to my owner-$Listname alias instead of going to the
operator of the local exploder.
d) Some hosts send DSNs to the address in the From: or To: header of the
message like they should. (Unfortunately, sending DSNs to the envelope
From address is a SHOULD and not a MUST in RFC1123.)
Cases a), b) and c) are all handled by a simple trick: Every 10 days or so,
(the frequency of this can be set from the configuration file) resend sends
one of the list's messages in a special way: Instead of sending the
message to the -outgoing alias with an envelope-from of
owner-$Listname\@$whereami, the message is sent individually to each
subscriber with a special envelope-from of
bouncefilter+$ListName=$1=$2\@$whereami
where $1 and $2 are obtained as follows:
$Addr=$Address;
$Addr=~s/=/=.=/g;
$Addr=~/^(.*)\@(.*)$/;
The processing of error bounces for these addresses relies on the feature
of sendmail that local delivery of messages addressed to an address of the
form $User+$Extra delivers to the mailbox or alias $User. Bouncefilter will
extract the information which is contained in the $Extra from the To: header.
(this is not the perfect solution, and in principle I'd know how to improve
it, but that would require me to hack the sendmail.cf and I don't have time
for that) All such bounces which are not recognized (by some simple
heuristics) as "delay notifications" are treated as failed DSNs, as above.
Case d) is different, because the DSNs are sent to the wrong address, and
the trick with putting that bouncefilter+ address into the envelope doesn't
help. Bouncefilter deals with this problem in the following way: Since there
is no reliable way of parsing such DSNs, bouncefilter discards BOUNCEs of
such DSNs from Majordomo's 'resend' program (so that the list-owners don't
get flooded with them) and every six months the following message is sent
to all subscribers to weed out the subscriber database:
From: bouncefilter+$ListName=$1=$2\@$whereami
To: bouncefilter+$ListName=$1=$2\@$whereami
Subject: Mailing list $ListName: Semi-annual subscription reminder
Hello!
This message is a reminder that you are subscribed to the mailing list
$ListName with the e-mail address $Address.
We hope that you are enjoying this mailing list. In that case, you can
simply delete this message and you will remain subscribed. Otherwise, you
may simply reply to this message - it doesn't matter if you write some
text in your reply or if you send back an empty message - and you will be
unsubscribed automatically.
On behalf of the list-owners,
$whereami
P.S. If you are subscibed with an outdated e-mail address which still
works, and you want to change it so that you're subscribed with your
up-to-date e-mail address, you can reply to this message for getting
your old e-mail address unsubscribed, but don't forget to send a
separate message to $whoami for subscribing with
your current e-mail address. For that subscription request it doesn't
matter what you put in the Subject: line, but in the 'text area' of
your e-mail message put the command:
subscribe $ListName
This does not only provide a reminder for updating e-mail addresses in
mailing list subscriptions, but it also gets rid of bad addresses at hosts
which send DSNs to the From: or the To: address and not the envelope from
address. (As a side effect, this may remove addresses with "cannot send
message for N hours" warnings if those warnings go to the header From: or
To: address instead of the envelope from. I firmly believe that this is
justified: When a host doesn't obey that SHOULD in RFC1123, and this
non-compliance causes trouble, it is right to unsubscribe that address and
send a notification which notes that they might want to find an e-mail
provider who sends error messages to the right address.)
Note: Handling of case d) is not fully implemented yet. See the file
doc/TODO.bouncefilter for details.
Note: In future releases, common cases of non-1894-compliant bounces will
probably be treated similarly like 1894-compliant bounces are handled
today.
Bug reports, other comments, etc. can be sent by e-mail to the author
Norbert Bollow . Please Cc: such messages to Richard Bullington
who has volunteered to act as Release Coordinator for
the Bouncefilter project.
There is also a related mailing list:
> To subscribe to BH-WORKERS send email to and in
> the body of the message write:
>
> subscribe bh-workers your@email.address.here
> end
Blessings from Switzerland!
Norbert.
--
Norbert Bollow (Zuerich, Switzerland; http://pobox.com/~nb)
serving Christ Jesus; co-owner of the CHURCHPLANTERS mailing list.
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 17:23:32 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA03834; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA03761 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 16:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from germany.it.earthlink.net (germany-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.123]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id JAA06192 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (ip242.an3-atlanta2.ga.pub-ip.psi.net [38.6.3.242])
by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA09808
for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710021608.JAA09808@germany.it.earthlink.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is
From: "Ray Osborne"
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 12:05:14 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: RE: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Reply-to: tekjobs@themall.net
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Thanks !
How does this software handle bounces ? Does it just delete the bounced receipt
or does it actually remove the email address from a master list ?
See my problem isn't with disposing of bounce receipts but rather
taking out the email address. This is an issue because I get paid by
my clients to advertise on my lists and they want to know how many
people will actually read their announcements. It pays me to employ
a work at home secretary to fine tune my mail lists.
So I need to do accurate counts on my multiple lists. As a ethical
list owner I think it is dishonest to say well I have 6,000 email addresses
in that target group and neglect the fact that 35% of it is bounced
email. I suppose I have to start counting the bounces eh ? But
anybody notice that bounces come in packets and some bounces
are replicated ?
From: Marc Mead
Reply-to: "mmead@revnet.com"
To: "'tekjobs@themall.net'"
Subject: RE: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:57:59 -0500
Organization: Revnet Systems
Hi Ray, have you looked at GroupMaster http://www.groupmaster.com ? It
handles bounces in the background without you ever lifting a finger, and is
extremely easy to use.
Check it out and let me know if I can help further.
Marc Mead
mailto:mmead@revnet.com
Revnet Systems
205-721-1420 ext. 717
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Osborne [SMTP:rko22@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 1997 4:43 PM
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Hi,
I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
features of Pegasus. Pegasus has some good filtering characterisitics
but I have been unable to write a script to remove the email
addresses of bounced email from a list.
I think the problem has to do with the non standardization of
returned mail. Unless there is a standard (a uniform code) that
I am unaware of. At the moment I am employing a work at home secretary
to keep my databases of email addresses fined tuned.
What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
are no longer useful ? If you discussed this already then I would
appreciate somebody telling me what date so I can find the archive.
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
Regards,
Ray Osborne
"Habit #4, Think Win/Win, Win/Win is not a technique, it's a total
philosophy of Human Interaction.." -Stephen Covey author of " The
Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.."
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 5 23:00:38 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id WAA20465; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 22:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.postmodern.com (kristeva.postmodern.com [198.102.244.54]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id WAA20445 for ; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 22:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from postmodern.com (foucault.postmodern.com [198.102.244.52]) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-960422) with ESMTP id WAA04949; Sun, 5 Oct 1997 22:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <34387D71.942C64CB@postmodern.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:56:40 -0700
From: "Michael C. Berch"
Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com
Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
CC: Reed Gleason
Subject: Re: Shouldn't recipient's address be in headers?
References: <3.0.1.16.19971001055953.1e27d10c@mail.teleport.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Reed Gleason wrote:
>
> Occasionally a s*bscriber will be receiving my list at one address, but
> will try to post or uns*bscribe from a different address, and they won't
> know what their s*bscribe address is. I tell them to look at all the
> headers and find out who the l*st messages are being sent to, but now I
> notice that, for my lists, the recipient isn't shown, at least not if
> you're using Eudora and click on "blah,blah,blah". Shouldn't lists be
> configured so the address the messages are sent to is in the headers?
>
> Some lists do... Listmom does:
> Return-Path: ListMom-Talk@SkyList.Net
> Received: from relay4.smtp.psi.net (relay4.smtp.psi.net [38.9.52.2]) by
> desiree.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA01271 for
> ; Wed, 17 Sep 1997 20:41:51 -0700 (PDT).....
>
> But List-managers doesn't:
> Return-Path: owner-list-managers-digest-outgoing@GreatCircle.COM
> Received: from relay5.UU.NET (relay5.UU.NET [192.48.96.15]) by
> portia.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA03871; Mon, 8 Sep 1997
> 01:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from honor.greatcircle.com by relay5.UU.NET with ESMTP
>
> Seems most Majordomo lists don't, but some do.
This is not a function of the list management software, but of the SMTP mail
transport agent (i.e., sendmail). In fact, it is the SMTP server on the
*recipient* host that should (if desired) add the "for "
string to the Received line.
It is not possible for list-managers (or other lists hosted at
greatcircle.com) to do this on the sending end, because we batch up recipients
and send them via a series of bulk SMTP transactions via our service provider.
Thus each copy of the message does not have a single SMTP envelope (RCPT)
recipient, it has many.
> What should I tell my s*bscriber who gets the list, but can't post because
> they're "not a s*bscriber"?
Use the Majordomo "which" command to find out their address on the list and
correct it if necessary.
--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com
From owner-list-managers-list Mon Oct 6 07:46:30 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id HAA11114; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from revnet1.revnet.com (revnet1.revnet.com [198.51.35.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id HAA11101 for ; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majestic.revnet.com (majestic.revnet.com [198.51.35.45]) by revnet1.revnet.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA01327; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:45:26 -0500
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:40:46 -0500
Message-ID: <01BCD23B.EC49E360.mmead@revnet.com>
From: Marc Mead
Reply-To: "mmead@revnet.com"
To: "'tekjobs@themall.net'" ,
"List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM"
Subject: RE: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:40:45 -0500
Organization: Revnet Systems
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Osborne [SMTP:rko22@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 1997 7:05 AM
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: RE: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Thanks !
How does this software handle bounces ? Does it just delete the bounced
receipt
or does it actually remove the email address from a master list ?
[Marc Mead] GroupMaster removes the bad address from the master list and
puts it in a list of invalid addresses. Bounces are classified as hard or
soft. Hard bounces are those that are simply undeliverable under any
circumstance (bad domain, etc.), and soft bounces are those that can't be
delivered temporarily due to a net hiccup. Hard ones are removed
immediately, while soft ones are re-sent until the bounce threshold (you
set) is breached, then removed. Once removed from the master list, they
can ve viewed at your leisure, re-validated manually, or deleted
completely.
See my problem isn't with disposing of bounce receipts but rather
taking out the email address. This is an issue because I get paid by
my clients to advertise on my lists and they want to know how many
people will actually read their announcements. It pays me to employ
a work at home secretary to fine tune my mail lists.
So I need to do accurate counts on my multiple lists. As a ethical
list owner I think it is dishonest to say well I have 6,000 email addresses
in that target group and neglect the fact that 35% of it is bounced
email. I suppose I have to start counting the bounces eh ? But
anybody notice that bounces come in packets and some bounces
are replicated ?
Beyond easy bounce-handling, GroupMaster keeps complete statistics on your
list size, list growth (or reduction, hope not!), all in a
week/month/year-to-date table (web gui). Also, it tracks the click-through
rate for embedded URLs in your messages. You know exactly how many people
(actual recipients, not bounces) are on each of your lists at any point in
time, and to some degree, you can determine your read-rate for messages.
Hope this helps. For a screen-shot tour of GroupMaster, visit
http://www.revnet.com/walk_thru/main.html
Marc Mead
Revnet Systems
mailto:mmead@revnet.com
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 7 16:42:39 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA14307; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id QAA14266 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cyberfam.cais.com.pop.cais.com (cyberfam.cais.com [207.176.65.70]) by cais.cais.com (8.8.5/CJKv1.99-CAIS) with SMTP id TAA27287 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 19:14:43 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971007092324.006b9ba4@pop.cais.com>
X-Sender: cyberfam@pop.cais.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:23:24 -0400
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Allison & Rick Martin
Subject: Legitimate address?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Is this a legitimate address? I just got this subscription request and
wondered if I should go ahead and add this person as requested.
From: cconceps@aol.com
Received: from default (190.jacksonville-04.fl.dial-access.att.net
[12.70.35.190]) by bigbang.eznet.it (8.8.2/8.8.2) with SMTP id IAA41162
Reply-To: user122@ybecker.net
X-PMFLAGS: 20720340.50
X-UIDL: 20720340_201230.501
Comments: Authenticated Sender is
Message-Id: 011297055501222@g_fantasm.com
Allison Martin
cyberfam@cais.com
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 7 17:31:05 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA17712; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.postmodern.com (kristeva.postmodern.com [198.102.244.54]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id QAA17629 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:52:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from mcb@localhost) by server.postmodern.com (8.8.5/mcb-960422) id QAA06826; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710072353.QAA06826@server.postmodern.com>
From: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 16:53:56 +0000
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19971007092324.006b9ba4@pop.cais.com>
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: Legitimate address?
Cc: Allison & Rick Martin
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Allison Martin writes:
> Is this a legitimate address? I just got this subscription request and
>
> From: cconceps@aol.com
> Received: from default (190.jacksonville-04.fl.dial-access.att.net
> [12.70.35.190]) by bigbang.eznet.it (8.8.2/8.8.2) with SMTP id
IAA41162
>
> Reply-To: user122@ybecker.net
> X-PMFLAGS: 20720340.50
> X-UIDL: 20720340_201230.501
> Comments: Authenticated Sender is
> Message-Id: 011297055501222@g_fantasm.com
We have blocked all subscription requests sent via the domains
dial-access.att.net
nlights.net
mom.hooked.net
as they have been the source of repeated subscription forgeries.
I have been in contact with the admins at Hooked, one of whom
is a well-known anti-spam activist, and they have promised to
bar SMTP relaying in the near future.
Having said that, I would caution that list-managers is probably not a
very good forum for asking "is _____ a legitimate address"; mostly
we won't know, the questions will flood the list, and the presence of
multiple domains in the Received lines ought to warn you that you
should at least confirm with the recipient.
--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 9 09:36:50 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id IAA15422; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 08:45:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from austin.bsdi.com (austin.BSDI.COM [205.230.232.49]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA15382 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 08:45:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from austin.bsdi.com ({zncNn3TNhgzUBFocGAg+u9hF8uBDYtGh}@localhost [127.0.0.1])
by austin.bsdi.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA03501
for ; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 09:47:31 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199710091547.JAA03501@austin.bsdi.com>
To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:50:42 -0000.
From: Tony Sanders
Organization: earth.com
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 09:47:31 -0600
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
"Ray Osborne" writes:
> I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
> particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
...
> What do you all use to delete and edit out email addresses that
> are no longer useful ? If you discussed this already then I would
> appreciate somebody telling me what date so I can find the archive.
...
From: "Ray Osborne"
> I dunno it's not a big problem as I retire my oldest mail lists and
> tell my subscribers to resubscribe.
I do believe that the occasional clean sweap is a pretty good idea
but for many lists that either isn't feasible or sufficient. For
example, on a bad day I can get many thousands of bounces on the
inet-access list (anybody else loath those UUCP relays that queue
email for 30 days? :-) so I need to process the bounces more often
than I would want to do a clean sweap (every coule of days). It's
actually kind of frightening to see how many supposedly ISP's
addresses go bad every day :-)
My strategy for dealing with bounces was to write a little perl script:
ftp://ftp.earth.com/pub/postmaster/bouncer
It currently handles 30 different bounce formats and it's only 380 lines
long and it's *very* easy to add new formats (just cut and past a few
lines and change the regexps).
It processes incoming bounces and logs the addresses if it thinks
it has figured it out, otherwise it logs the actual bounced email
(which you can then process and add the new formats to the code or
ignore or whatever). There are file size limits on each of the
two output files so you can pretty much ignore it and nothing will
break.
I periodically run:
sort < bouncers | uniq -c | sort -n
And remove addresses that are over some threshold (you have to
decide that for your list -- it depends on the amount of traffic).
I would be *very* reluctant to let anything automatically process
these and remove people from the list because I have seen too many
cases where that would screw you (e.g., "hard" failures that really
weren't that would have erroneously removed 20 people if it were
automatically processed).
One feature I would like to add to bouncer is to have it read in
the actual mailing list and try to match addresses up using some
fuzzy matching. Pretty trivial to add, just haven't gotten around
to it yet (I already have the fuzzy matching code).
I have another utility that can remove lines from a file (with locking)
based on a perl5 pattern:
ftp://ftp.earth.com/pub/postmaster/eradicate
So you might want to play around with that as well (I use it for removing
addresses from the sendmail queue files that are undeliverable for
N days and piling up). You could write a simple script to process
the bouncers file and run eradicate to remove them from the list
(eradicate could (and should be) greatly simplified using the
appropriate perl5 interfaces -- but it works; it was originally written
for perl4 but I switched it to use perl5 because of the improvments
to the regexps).
One strategy I've been testing out for those nasty sites like webtv,
prodigy, HP 1.37.109.16/15.5+ECS 3.4 (whatever the heck that is),
IMA Internet Exchange, and Microsoft SMTP SVC, that have useless
bounce formats is to resolve all the MX'es for every address on
the list and then compare the Recieved lines against that.
I saw that one other person has a similar project going but I think
my solution might be more flexible (for some anyway) since it is
standalone and doesn't care too much what MLM or MTA you have.
If you add stuff to bouncer please send me back a copy and I'll
make it available on the ftp site. If anyone is interested
in making this production quality that would great. Right now
it's kind of experimental.
From owner-list-managers-list Thu Oct 9 11:08:47 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id KAA03044; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 10:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id KAA03030 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 10:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from tibbs@localhost) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA11898; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:15:31 -0500 (CDT)
To: Tony Sanders
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
References: <199710091547.JAA03501@austin.bsdi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.100)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Jason L Tibbitts III
Date: 09 Oct 1997 12:15:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: Tony Sanders's message of Thu, 09 Oct 1997 09:47:31 -0600
Message-ID:
Lines: 13
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.46/Emacs 19.34
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
>>>>> "TS" == Tony Sanders writes:
TS> One strategy I've been testing out for those nasty sites like webtv,
TS> prodigy, HP 1.37.109.16/15.5+ECS 3.4 (whatever the heck that is), IMA
TS> Internet Exchange, and Microsoft SMTP SVC, that have useless bounce
TS> formats is to resolve all the MX'es for every address on the list and
TS> then compare the Recieved lines against that.
Note that a tool (quick hack, really) to do this is at
ftp.hpc.uh.edu:pub/majordomo/do_mx. It currently requires the 'host'
command that comes with BIND, but could probably work with nslookup.
- J<
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 10 07:28:29 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id HAA09958; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webster.m-w.com ([206.98.43.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id HAA09938 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:23:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by m-w.com (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.0)
id AA27508; Fri, 10 Oct 97 10:18:08 EDT
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 97 10:18:08 EDT
From: awest@webster.m-w.com (Amy West)
Message-Id: <9710101418.AA27508@m-w.com>
To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com
In-Reply-To: List-Managers-Digest's message of Wed, 8 Oct 1997 17:35:21 -0700 (PDT) <199710090035.RAA19662@honor.greatcircle.com>
Subject: TAN: Vandeman
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
As a rec.bicycles reader, I was not surprised to read the complaint
about Vandeman here. There's actually a rec.bicycles FAQ devoted
to him and the havoc his abuse of net resources has caused.
---Amy West
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 10 09:28:56 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id JAA19867; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:19:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell.wco.com (shell.wco.com [199.4.94.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id JAA19817 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from User.wco.com (rock14.wco.com [199.4.109.114])
by shell.wco.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/WCO-18jul97) with SMTP id JAA15980;
Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971010083558.009207e0@mail.wco.com>
X-Sender: 2bits@mail.wco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:35:58 -0700
To: awest@webster.m-w.com (Amy West)
From: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com>
Subject: Re: TAN: Vandeman
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To: <9710101418.AA27508@m-w.com>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 10:18 AM 10/10/97 EDT, Amy West wrote:
>As a rec.bicycles reader, I was not surprised to read the complaint
>about Vandeman here. There's actually a rec.bicycles FAQ devoted
>to him and the havoc his abuse of net resources has caused.
Just to follow up, David O'Donnell sent me a note on Wednessday saying that
he sut down Vandeman's dotmorriso account and acknowledged that Vandeman
had been in trouble with AOL before. I will follow up with a note asking
how complaints about the type of abuse exhibitted by Vandeman can be better
brought to AOL's attention for a swifter response. If I get a reply to
that, I'll share it.
My apologies to those who did not appreciate my detailed account of the
pattern of complaints and inaction at AOL. My thanks for those who added
their support and effort to changing that.
Todd
--
============================================================
"When the cyclist roams freely on his steely steed
in the godly world of Nature . . . his heart rises
and he bewonders the splendor of Creation."
--Wilhelm Wolf (1890)
------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Ourston * 2bits@wco.com * Marin County, California
============================================================
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 10 19:07:06 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id SAA10350; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from taz.hyperreal.org (taz.hyperreal.org [204.62.130.147]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id SAA09862 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 1788 invoked from network); 11 Oct 1997 01:36:23 -0000
Received: from localhost.hyperreal.com (HELO brianb.organic.com) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost.hyperreal.com with SMTP; 11 Oct 1997 01:36:23 -0000
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971010182050.00916920@hyperreal.org>
X-Sender: brian@hyperreal.org
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:20:50 -0700
To: Tony Sanders , List-Managers@greatcircle.com
From: Brian Behlendorf
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
In-Reply-To: <199710091547.JAA03501@austin.bsdi.com>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 09:47 AM 10/9/97 -0600, Tony Sanders wrote:
>My strategy for dealing with bounces was to write a little perl script:
> ftp://ftp.earth.com/pub/postmaster/bouncer
>
>It currently handles 30 different bounce formats and it's only 380 lines
>long and it's *very* easy to add new formats (just cut and past a few
>lines and change the regexps).
You could do away with guesswork completely by using VERPs.
Up until Wednesday I was using a combination sendmail/qmail setup, where
sendmail was my SMTP daemon and I was using qmail to deliver a couple
hundred thousand list messages per day. VERP's can be used in this
situation, if you train sendmail to handle variable addresses of the form
list-owner-*@host.com (* being the recipient email address, with "@"
replaced with "=").
When a message bounces, you know programmatically who the recipient was,
and can generate bounce reports in a few lines of perl; the brave could
even automate it further and remove users after bouncing for >n days or
something.
Brian
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
"it's a big world, with lots of records to play."-sig brian@hyperreal.org
From owner-list-managers-list Fri Oct 10 19:37:07 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id TAA11348; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns.telephonet.com (ns.telephonet.com [207.254.96.11]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id TAA11341 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [207.254.96.49] (vjs.telephonet.com [207.254.96.49]) by ns.telephonet.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA09852 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:24:46 -0400
X-Sender: humour@humournet.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <199710091547.JAA03501@austin.bsdi.com>
References: Your message of Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:50:42 -0000.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Organization: Little to None
X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:15:36 -0400
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Vince Sabio
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
** Sometime around 11:47 -0400 10/9/97, Tony Sanders said:
>"Ray Osborne" writes:
>> I am interested in utitlity tools to help maintain my mail lists. In
>> particular bounced mail. I don't use a listserv but rather the mail
::snip::
>My strategy for dealing with bounces was to write a little perl script:
> ftp://ftp.earth.com/pub/postmaster/bouncer
>
>It currently handles 30 different bounce formats and it's only 380 lines
>long and it's *very* easy to add new formats (just cut and past a few
>lines and change the regexps).
::snip::
SmartBounce recognizes nearly 200 formats currently, with more being
added from time to time. Also, since it is in C, it's pretty fast.
> sort < bouncers | uniq -c | sort -n
>And remove addresses that are over some threshold (you have to
>decide that for your list -- it depends on the amount of traffic).
>I would be *very* reluctant to let anything automatically process
>these and remove people from the list because I have seen too many
>cases where that would screw you (e.g., "hard" failures that really
>weren't that would have erroneously removed 20 people if it were
>automatically processed).
This is an excellent point, and is the reason that SmartBounce allows
you to "track" both hard and soft bounces; you can select a threshold
over which the bouncing addresses will be removed from the list. In the
new version, you can track them (hard and soft) separately, and with
separate thresholds.
>One feature I would like to add to bouncer is to have it read in
>the actual mailing list and try to match addresses up using some
>fuzzy matching. Pretty trivial to add, just haven't gotten around
>to it yet (I already have the fuzzy matching code).
SmartBounce does this -- and I've found that it's a pretty important
feature most of the time. (It depends on the server, by and large --
LISTSERV, for example, is very good at returned the actual list address.
I don't know how it does it, but probably 99% of the time, the address
that it returns is in the same format as the one in the subscribers
file.
For an MLM that basically eliminates bounced mail entirely, look into
Lyris: . Note that Lyris's approach to the
problem can be cause for discussion; I'm merely mentioning solutions
here, not trying to reopen worm containers ... ;-)
>I saw that one other person has a similar project going but I think
>my solution might be more flexible (for some anyway) since it is
>standalone and doesn't care too much what MLM or MTA you have.
SmartBounce also supports a pretty wide range of MLMs, and it does not
care at all what MTA you are using. Also, if an MLM is not supported,
it can still process the bounces and generate an "unformatted" server
file for you; in addition, I add MLMs as people request.
SmartBounce comes in freeware and commercial flavors; for more info,
see: .
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre:
vince@humournet.com HumourNet:
Stop Internet Spam!
Segmentation Fault: Operating System Not Booted
From owner-list-managers-list Sun Oct 12 23:04:12 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id WAA21338; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id WAA21297 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pine.liii.com (pine.liii.com [198.207.193.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id EAA28324 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rowan.liii.com by pine.liii.com with ESMTP
(8.8.6/8.8.5) id MAA05583; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:00:16 GMT
Received: from localhost (denic@localhost)
by rowan.liii.com (8.8.6/8.8.4) with SMTP
id IAA07496 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 1997 08:00:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: rowan.liii.com: denic owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 08:00:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dennis N. Aruta"
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Attacks on mailing lists
In-Reply-To: <199710090115.SAA24814@honor.greatcircle.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I have recently noticed by accident, when the subscriber to my mailing
list mail was rejected (ISP was malfunctioning) that postings to the
list were automatically forwarded to a host of enemies of the list.
Is there anyway to prevent this other than unsubscribing??
Is there a probe which can identify those that do this?
Dennis Aruta, Owner ShipFix (c) & International Commerce List (c),
IC-L#0000
http://members.aol.com./denicny/trade.html
(LIVE chat)---> e-mail for schedule/access info
Mailing address:
Denar Chartering Inc.(since 1971) Phone: 516-326-2300
P.O. Box 1147, Denar House Fax: 516-326-2519
New Hyde Park N.Y. 11040 Tlx: 4971419
U.S.A. email: Denic@liii.com
Denic@denar.com
Denar@denar.com
DenicNY@aol.com
From owner-list-managers-list Mon Oct 13 10:29:06 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id KAA28622; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pine.liii.com (pine.liii.com [198.207.193.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id KAA28615 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rowan.liii.com by pine.liii.com with ESMTP
(8.8.6/8.8.5) id RAA03236; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 17:21:49 GMT
Received: from localhost (denic@localhost)
by rowan.liii.com (8.8.6/8.8.4) with SMTP
id NAA13439; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:21:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: rowan.liii.com: denic owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:21:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dennis N. Aruta"
To: Kynn Bartlett
cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Attacks on mailing lists
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19971013084523.00cb3c90@mail.idyllmtn.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> At 08:00 a.m. 10/09/97 -0400, Dennis N. Aruta wrote:
> >I have recently noticed by accident, when the subscriber to my mailing
> >list mail was rejected (ISP was malfunctioning) that postings to the
> >list were automatically forwarded to a host of enemies of the list.
>
> "Enemies" of the list?
>
> >Is there anyway to prevent this other than unsubscribing??
>
> Only way for you to prevent the "wrong people" from joining your
> list is to make it a closed list, where you approve everyone
> who joins -- and only let on the people you trust.
IC-L is a closed list, with our committee approving members.
Each subscriber must provide detailed info.
> It's trivial these days to get an account or email address, and
> autoforward stuff someplace else. I'd say that if you're saying
> stuff on an open list, it should be something you wouldn't mind
> _anyone_ hearing -- even your "enemies".
It becomes open when members program automatic " receipiant surpressed"
script hidden to forward each msg posted to the list to their private
mega lists.
> (What kind of a list do you run, that has "enemies"? I've
> ne'er heard of such a thing.)
IC-L and ShipFix lists are commercial in nature, therefore open to
probing by competitors, clones, (hundreds have been established)
since 1994
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 04:01:49 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id BAA12146; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PTSINT1.PTSI.NET ([207.50.0.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id BAA12114 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [207.50.2.71] ([207.50.2.71])
by PTSINT1.PTSI.NET (2.0 Build 2119 (Berkeley 8.8.4)/8.8.4) with ESMTP
id DAA03702 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 03:59:07 -0500
X-Sender: holliste@ptsint1.ptsi.net
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <199710140800.BAA07791@honor.greatcircle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
x-no-archive: yes
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 03:58:27 -0600
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: Lance Hollister
Subject: De-Lurk and Question
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Greetings,
I'm new to this list and also new to operating lists. I've recently
started two closed lists for correctional officers. Due to the nature of
topics being discussed each list subscriptions is handled manually. One
list requires a questionaire the other physical documentation to join. The
first list has been operating less than two weeks and have around twenty
members the second isn't active yet. Two questions. What is the best way
to get the word out about the list and what is the best way to keep
participation up to keep the lists alive. Hopefully the questions aren't
too general and that they are within the intended scope of this list.
Lance Hollister
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 16:46:57 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA25116; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA25085 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ayla.idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id IAA16706 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 08:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grev.idyllmtn.com (grev.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.108])
by ayla.idyllmtn.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA12187;
Mon, 13 Oct 1997 08:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971013084523.00cb3c90@mail.idyllmtn.com>
X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 08:45:23 -0700
To: "Dennis N. Aruta"
From: Kynn Bartlett
Subject: Re: Attacks on mailing lists
Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
In-Reply-To:
References: <199710090115.SAA24814@honor.greatcircle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 08:00 a.m. 10/09/97 -0400, Dennis N. Aruta wrote:
>I have recently noticed by accident, when the subscriber to my mailing
>list mail was rejected (ISP was malfunctioning) that postings to the
>list were automatically forwarded to a host of enemies of the list.
"Enemies" of the list?
>Is there anyway to prevent this other than unsubscribing??
Only way for you to prevent the "wrong people" from joining your
list is to make it a closed list, where you approve everyone
who joins -- and only let on the people you trust.
It's trivial these days to get an account or email address, and
autoforward stuff someplace else. I'd say that if you're saying
stuff on an open list, it should be something you wouldn't mind
_anyone_ hearing -- even your "enemies".
(What kind of a list do you run, that has "enemies"? I've
ne'er heard of such a thing.)
--
/\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com
/ \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet
/ \ //\ /\ \ / \
'_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Virtual Dog Show is open! www.dogshow.com
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 17:17:02 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA02473; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA24821 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NrgUp.Com (garbo.nrgup.com [208.150.70.114]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id FAA21199 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 26192 invoked by uid 501); 13 Oct 1997 07:24:28 -0500
Message-ID: <19971013072428.14158@NrgUp.Com>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:24:28 -0500
From: Jonathan Bradshaw
To: List Managers
Subject: Help, what Mickeysoft software does this?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.81
X-Mailer-Info: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/
X-Operating-System: Linux Garbo 2.0.30
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
I have some mailing list posters who appear to use some sort of Mickeysoft
program/gateway to post with. The message ID of each message is:
MAPI.Id.0016.00726f6c6c2020203030303530303035@MAPI.to.RFC822
Which is nasty but worse, its STATIC. It does not change for each message, so
that means the list software drops any followup messages from them as
duplicates.
I'd like to identify this software so I can post a warning about it. Anyone
seen it?
--
Jonathan Bradshaw (Jonathan@NrgUp.Com) | Novell 4.x CNE | Ham Call N9OXE
Client Systems Architect -- Boehringer Mannheim Corp., Indianapolis, IN.
1024 PGP Key fingerprint EA 16 1B 5D 5D 94 6B 06 58 FD E6 E9 52 F3 6E 11
Better drowned if duffers, if not duffers, won't drown | CPT/DPMA/PURDUE
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 17:17:15 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id QAA02636; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) id QAA24689 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id CAA11672 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 02:44:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from thales.math.ethz.ch (bollow@thales [129.132.146.160]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id LAA04139 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:47:28 +0200
Received: (bollow@localhost) by thales.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id LAA13145; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:47:28 +0200
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:47:28 +0200
Message-Id: <199710130947.LAA13145@thales.math.ethz.ch>
From: Norbert Bollow
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Bug in "alpha test" version of Bouncefilter
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
In case anyone is playing with version 2.1a2 of Bouncefilter about which I
posted recently, I strongly recommend setting $DEBUG = 0; (this setting is
near the top of the file named 'bouncefilter') because there's a bug which
can (under unususal circumstances) become dangerous otherwise.
I'm working on version 2.1a3 (another alpha version, nothing you could trust)
which will have bug-fixes, improvements and probably also new bugs. If you're
interested in being notified when it's ready, feel free to drop me a private
e-mail, or join this mailing list (which is for discussion of work on automated
bounce-handlers in general, not just Bouncefilter):
> To subscribe to BH-WORKERS send email to and in
> the body of the message write:
>
> subscribe bh-workers your@email.address.here
> end
Blessings from Switzerland!
Norbert.
P.S. Someone had difficulty to reach me via because of a silly
anti-spam hack at pobox.com, for this reason I'm now advertising my
e-mail address as which should work for everyone.
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 19:31:48 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id TAA20447; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hyperreal.org (taz.hyperreal.org [204.62.130.147]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id SAA17961 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 6782 invoked from network); 15 Oct 1997 01:59:45 -0000
Received: from localhost.hyperreal.com (HELO brianb.organic.com) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost.hyperreal.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 1997 01:59:45 -0000
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971014185717.008ee100@hyperreal.org>
X-Sender: brian@hyperreal.org
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:57:17 -0700
To: Keith Moore
From: Brian Behlendorf
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com
In-Reply-To: <199710142323.TAA08223@spot.cs.utk.edu>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 07:23 PM 10/14/97 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
>> At 09:47 AM 10/9/97 -0600, Tony Sanders wrote:
>> >My strategy for dealing with bounces was to write a little perl script:
>> > ftp://ftp.earth.com/pub/postmaster/bouncer
>> >
>> >It currently handles 30 different bounce formats and it's only 380 lines
>> >long and it's *very* easy to add new formats (just cut and past a few
>> >lines and change the regexps).
>>
>> You could do away with guesswork completely by using VERPs.
>>
>
>No you can't.
>
>Giving each subscriber a separate return address helps you find out
>which subscriber returned the message, but it doesn't tell you why the
>message came back. Messages get returned to the envelope return
>address for a number of reasons that don't involve nondelivery -
You can apply heuristics to the number and frequency of bouncing messages,
particularly if your bounce handler also has a sense of what the list
traffic looks like. The typical bounce handler algorithm might say that if
a particular address is bouncing messages for more than 5 days, and is
bouncing more than 25% of messages it is sent, it should be removed from
the list.
>vacation notices,
If someone's vacation program is autoresponding to the list owner for every
message, I'd want them removed.
>"delay" notifications,
If delay messages come through for more than 5 days, I'd want them removed.
>positive delivery reports,
I've run high-volume mailing lists for several years now, and can count the
number of positive delivery reports I've gotten on one finger.
>and broken UAs or gateways that reply to the wrong address.
Those messages won't ever be seen by list-owner anyways (more likely
they'll be seen by the original author of a given message), so it's kinda
hard to fix that.
>You don't want to treat all of these as if they were bounces.
Given time, I think I might.
Using Precendence: bulk, most "informational" messages are avoided, and
only fatal or near-fatal errors are sent.
>The qmail manual doesn't bother to mention that the "VERP" technique
>can require a lot of extra bandwidth and processing time, due to
>separate retransmission of every message to every recipient.
>Perhaps that's because qmail is lazy and retransmits a separate
>copy of the message to each recipient anyway.
I used to be on the other side of the debate until I sat down and crunched
some numbers. In terms of processor time, qmail's impact upon a machine
with a given amount of memory and CPU power was far less than sendmail's
impact, given a certain number of mail deliveries per day, simply because
qmail's memory footprint was far smaller and thus far less swapping was
taking place and startup time was much less, even though it does do a
fork() per delivery. I also analyzed the addresses on my list and
concluded that per-recipient delivery only resulted in a 20% increase in
number of SMTP conversations, since fully 80% of the people were on
machines by themselves. Since WWW access to my machine is far greater than
email, this was noticeable but negligible. The fundamental question was,
do I want to save myself an hour or two a day by having bounces handled
automatically, or do I want to shave a small chunk of bandwidth? The
answer was conclusive.
Brian
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
"it's a big world, with lots of records to play."-sig brian@hyperreal.org
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 22:01:51 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id VAA02310; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.wasatch.com (ns.wasatch.com [204.99.129.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id VAA02287 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LOCALNAME (209.63.78.51) by mail.wasatch.com with smtp
(Linux Smail3.2.0.94 #1) id m0xLLP1-000SYYC; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:49:47 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <34445776.4C05@wasatch.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:41:10 -0700
From: "W. David Samuelsen"
Reply-To: "W. David Samuelsen"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Resource site on spammer info?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Is there a website somewhere I can check out to find the listing of the
spammer networks I can use to add to the blacklist?
W. David Samuelsen
From owner-list-managers-list Tue Oct 14 23:01:38 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id WAA04819; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eagle.ns.net (eagle.ns.net [204.75.146.20]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id WAA04802 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from monkeys.com (segfault.monkeys.com [204.119.242.200])
by eagle.ns.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA27812;
Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:01:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by monkeys.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA02684;
Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:03:05 -0700
To: "W. David Samuelsen"
cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: Resource site on spammer info?
In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:41:10 -0700.
<34445776.4C05@wasatch.com>
X-Copyright: (c) 1997 Ronald F. Guilmette; All rights reserved.
Reply-To: rfg@monkeys.com
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:03:05 -0700
Message-ID: <2681.876895385@monkeys.com>
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
In message <34445776.4C05@wasatch.com>, you wrote:
>Is there a website somewhere I can check out to find the listing of the
>spammer networks I can use to add to the blacklist?
>
>W. David Samuelsen
Included below is the blacklist I'm using in conjunction with my own
filtering tool lately. I have been tuning these filtering parameters
quite a bit recently and them seem to be working quite well at the moment.
Note that I blacklist certain specific headers, as well as certain
specific domains and addresses. The blacklisted headers are included
in the list below also.
The following blacklist is also visible at:
http://www.e-scrub.com/cgi-bin/blacklists.cgi
Blacklist-User: DJT1313@aol.com
Blacklist-User: rforte@netcom.com
Blacklist-User: 93753_gynaecologist@hPnZ21.com
Blacklist-User: BJHN63A@prodigy.com
Blacklist-User: IntellegentSourceGroup@classic.msn.com
Blacklist-User: d3j6a4@www.bewellnet.com
Blacklist-User: qbert5@hotmail.com
Blacklist-User: lucy2@ix.netcom.com
Blacklist-User: Bill86@hotmail.com
Blacklist-User: datasystem@rocketmail.com
Blacklist-User: remi25@compuserve.com
Blacklist-User: jnj@bear.iinet.com
Blacklist-User: webbs@tds.net
Blacklist-User: op@brokersys.com
Blacklist-Domain: ambience.com
Blacklist-Domain: hal9k.com
Blacklist-Domain: savoynet.com
Blacklist-Domain: BC.net
Blacklist-Domain: ido.net
Blacklist-Domain: senie.com
Blacklist-Domain: iemmc.org
Blacklist-Domain: spica.net
Blacklist-Domain: quantcom.com
Blacklist-Domain: csi.com
Blacklist-Domain: hudson.co.jp
Blacklist-Domain: mail-response.com
Blacklist-Domain: FurnitureCare.Com
Blacklist-Domain: keylink.net
Blacklist-Domain: internetfci.net
Blacklist-Domain: ms.uu.net
Blacklist-Domain: da.uu.net
Blacklist-Domain: we-deliver.net
Blacklist-Domain: freeyellow.com
Blacklist-Domain: answerme.com
Blacklist-Domain: savetrees.com
Blacklist-Domain: lostvegas.com
Blacklist-Domain: nevwest.com
Blacklist-Domain: llv.com
Blacklist-Domain: enterprise.net
Blacklist-Domain: t-1net.com
Blacklist-Domain: rcorco.rco.qc.ca
Blacklist-Domain: firstgear.com
Blacklist-Domain: c-flash.net
Blacklist-Domain: boulevards.com
Blacklist-Domain: scscomm.com
Blacklist-Domain: weavers.net
Blacklist-Domain: tnlb.com
Blacklist-Domain: 1-global.com
Blacklist-Domain: 1stfamily.com
Blacklist-Domain: stealthmail.com
Blacklist-Domain: cydult.com
Blacklist-Domain: usinternet.com
Blacklist-Domain: usinter.net
Blacklist-Domain: adram.org
Blacklist-Domain: iainc.net
Blacklist-Domain: naspa.net
Blacklist-Domain: cow-net.com
Blacklist-Domain: hometeam.com
Blacklist-Domain: addurl.com
Blacklist-Domain: globalpac.com
Blacklist-Domain: parker.inter.net.il
Blacklist-Domain: cableol.net
Blacklist-Header: Received: -0600 (EST)
Blacklist-Header: Received: -0700 (EST)
Blacklist-Header: Received: -400 (EST)
Blacklist-Header: Received: 6000 (EST)
Blacklist-Header: Received: from --- unknown host ---
Blacklist-Header: Received: Wakeup
Blacklist-Header: Received: from --- CLOAKED! ---
Blacklist-Header: To: Friend@public.com
Blacklist-Header: To: Recipient list suppressed
Blacklist-Header: To: Recipient List Suppressed
Blacklist-Header: To: undisclosed-recipients:
Blacklist-Header: To: WebSiteOwner@
Blacklist-Header: TO: ..............................................
Blacklist-Header: To: @_
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: RAF1
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: Mach10
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 19970237052
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 394810482832
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 505770395032
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 8a4d5eb172ca6d
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 21504739004014
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: <>
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 0000000000.AAA000@
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Avalanche
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Mailcast
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Platinum
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Extractor
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Group Mail
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: TURBO
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: WindoZ
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Floodgate
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Stalker
Blacklist-Header: X-Mailer: Acme
Blacklist-Header: X-Sender: Extractor
Blacklist-Header: X-Sender: News Breaker
Blacklist-Header: X-Sender: Yourdora
Blacklist-Header: Organization: #######
Blacklist-Header: Organization: 1884EntertainmentGroupInc.
Blacklist-Header: Organization: A.P.R.C.
Blacklist-Header: Organization: AdMasters
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Contact Data Systems
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Cyber Sender
Blacklist-Header: Organization: FrdBib
Blacklist-Header: Organization: GanCot Enterprises
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Internet Relay
Blacklist-Header: Organization: NetPower Publishing
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Socket(r) Internet Services Corporation INN Site
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Subscriber, Pacific Internet, Singapore
Blacklist-Header: Organization: SuperCD Group
Blacklist-Header: Organization: Tescom Ltd.
Blacklist-Header: Organization: de Haas Lotteries
Blacklist-Header: Organization: hryals1@combase.com
Blacklist-Header: Apparently-From:
Blacklist-Header: Bcc:
Blacklist-Header: Comment: Authenticated sender is
Blacklist-Header: Date-warning:
Blacklist-Header: Mail-For:
Blacklist-Header: Precedence: Non-Urgent
Blacklist-Header: Precedence: Urgent
Blacklist-Header: Precedence: special-delivery
Blacklist-Header: Priority: Bulk
Blacklist-Header: Priority: First-Class
Blacklist-Header: Priority: Special-Delivery
Blacklist-Header: Priority: high
Blacklist-Header: Recieved:
Blacklist-Header: Sent:
Blacklist-Header: Status: MA
Blacklist-Header: Warning: ActiveAgent
Blacklist-Header: X-1:
Blacklist-Header: X-:
Blacklist-Header: X-Advertisement:
Blacklist-Header: X-Advertisment:
Blacklist-Header: X-AirNote:
Blacklist-Header: X-Authenticated-Sender:
Blacklist-Header: X-BlackMail:
Blacklist-Header: X-Distribution:
Blacklist-Header: X-EPUB-ID:
Blacklist-Header: X-Flags:
Blacklist-Header: X-ListServer:
Blacklist-Header: X-Note:
Blacklist-Header: X-PMFLAG-:
Blacklist-Header: X-PMFLAGS:
Blacklist-Header: X-Shocking-Site:
Blacklist-Header: X-Tagname:
Blacklist-Header: X-UIDL:
Blacklist-Header: X-UltraMail:
Blacklist-Header: X-Visit:
Blacklist-Header: X10:
-- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc.
-- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/
-- Wpoison (web harvester poisoning) - demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 15 00:16:38 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id AAA11535; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hyperreal.org (taz.hyperreal.org [204.62.130.147]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id AAA11524 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 5688 invoked from network); 15 Oct 1997 07:19:05 -0000
Received: from localhost.hyperreal.com (HELO brianb.organic.com) (127.0.0.1)
by localhost.hyperreal.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 1997 07:19:05 -0000
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971015000252.008a12d0@hyperreal.org>
X-Sender: brian@hyperreal.org
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:02:52 -0700
To: Eric Thomas , Keith Moore
From: Brian Behlendorf
Subject: Re: list mgmt tools (bounces)
Cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 05:54 AM 10/15/97 +0200, Eric Thomas wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:57:17 -0700 Brian Behlendorf
>said:
>>In terms of processor time, qmail's impact upon a machine with a given
>>amount of memory and CPU power was far less than sendmail's impact,
>>given a certain number of mail deliveries per day,
>
>Sure, but this is an implementation issue and is not related to the lack
>of RCPT aggregation.
True, but Keith just said "processor time", and didn't specify sender or
recipient machine processor time.
>>I also analyzed the addresses on my list and concluded that
>>per-recipient delivery only resulted in a 20% increase in number of SMTP
>>conversations, since fully 80% of the people were on machines by
>>themselves.
>
>The problem is that these 20% mostly go to large ISP sites that already
>have slowish mail servers, and it is a lot faster to send them a single
>message with 100 recipients than 100 with 1 (I am thinking in particular
>of AOL :-) ).
This is just not the common case for the mailing lists I house. Only a few
of my lists have more than a dozen AOL addresses. Besides, sendmail at
most delivers to 20 addresses in the same SMTP conversation. In addition,
there is an increased liklihood that a message to 100 recipients will fail
(think about it - at least 206 TCP round trips before you even get to
DATA), thus causing problems for delivery to ALL 100. Even if you discount
the benefits of speed of parallel delivery (it's not important to me
either, whether a message is delivered in 2 seconds or 10 seconds), the
advantages of single-recipient messages seem clear.
>And of course if everyone did that to them, their mail
>servers would just collapse.
Just as they do today :) No, if everyone did that to them, they'd invest a
proper amount of money in hardware for mail handling, or better software,
or in developing local expanders or newsgroups for high-volume lists. I
guess I just can't justify giving myself two extra (volunteer) hours of
work per day to alleviate a burden on AOL.
>Anyway, my point is that you don't need to make EVERY message different
>to collect on these benefits. It is enough to make some of the messages
>carry an individual MAIL FROM: and let the rest go out normally.
You make some good points. The only thing I can think of that the
"occasional VERP" system doesn't allow is a feature Dan's "ezmlm" package
has, which is that it can keep track of which messages you didn't get, and
then let you know they are available and give you information on how to get
them. In that situation not only the recipient but also a mailing list
message number is inserted into the return path.
My primary concern with, say, making one message per day a VERP message, is
that it might not give me enough information to really make a decision
about whether to remove someone. For example, there are some HotMail
addresses which seem to bounce about 25% of the time. It's quite
frustrating. Should I remove addresses if they bounce twice in a 5 day
window? Hmm. It's much clearer to say I should remove a user who bounces
50 messages out of 200 in a 5-day window.
Dan has other arguments in favor of the single-recipient message model,
such as it simplifies qmail design and its robustness. *shrug*.
Brian
--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
"it's a big world, with lots of records to play."-sig brian@hyperreal.org
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 15 10:51:29 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id KAA20360; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [198.7.0.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id KAA20318 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [38.217.47.3] (internal.northsouth.com [38.217.47.3]) by mail1.panix.com (8.8.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0) with ESMTP id NAA08573 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:36:56 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <199710150800.BAA16424@honor.greatcircle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:07:15 -0500
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: "Kent S. Larsen II"
Subject: Re: De-Lurk and Question
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
At 1:00 AM -0700 10/15/97, Lance Hollister wrote:
>
>Greetings,
>
>I'm new to this list and also new to operating lists. I've recently
>started two closed lists for correctional officers. Due to the nature of
>topics being discussed each list subscriptions is handled manually. One
>list requires a questionaire the other physical documentation to join. The
>first list has been operating less than two weeks and have around twenty
>members the second isn't active yet. Two questions. What is the best way
>to get the word out about the list and what is the best way to keep
>participation up to keep the lists alive. Hopefully the questions aren't
>too general and that they are within the intended scope of this list.
>
>Lance Hollister
>
You should consider joining the List-Promotion list and asking that
question there.
The following is from the list footer, and gives subscription info:
___________ List-Promotion Discussion List _____________
To Remove: Email---> mailto:remove-list-promotion@sparklist.com
To Join: Email---> mailto:join-list-promotion@sparklist.com
To Post: Email---> mailto:list-promotion@sparklist.com
Kent S. "Kip" Larsen II; KLarsen@panix.com or KLarsen@NorthSouth.com (work).
Pass the SPAM ban! Ask your Congressperson to support CAUCE
http://www.cauce.org
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 15 11:47:49 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id KAA20407; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [198.7.0.32]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id KAA20337 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [38.217.47.3] (internal.northsouth.com [38.217.47.3]) by mail1.panix.com (8.8.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0) with ESMTP id NAA08581 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:36:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <199710150800.BAA16424@honor.greatcircle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:26:36 -0500
To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM
From: "Kent S. Larsen II"
Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V6 #203
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Great help, Ron.
I just want to comment on couple of things about some of the individual
lines which may be a problem in certain situations or may be confusing:
At 1:00 AM -0700 10/15/97, "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote:
>
>The following blacklist is also visible at:
>
> http://www.e-scrub.com/cgi-bin/blacklists.cgi
>
>Blacklist-Domain: ms.uu.net
>Blacklist-Domain: da.uu.net
The point here is that these domains do not exists at uu.net, not that they
are actual domains used by spammers. I assume that is true with a number of
the domains listed.
>Blacklist-Header: Received: -0600 (EST)
>Blacklist-Header: Received: -0700 (EST)
>Blacklist-Header: Received: -400 (EST)
>Blacklist-Header: Received: 6000 (EST)
These are great. It shows you the lack of attention to detail that is
common among spammers - spam is an easy (and unethical) way to advertise,
so those that want to spam are going to take the easy way out. Its just
slopply to have -0600 and (EST) when the EST time zone will never be 6
hours off of greenwich time.
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: RAF1
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: Mach10
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 19970237052
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 394810482832
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 505770395032
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 8a4d5eb172ca6d
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 21504739004014
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: <>
>Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 0000000000.AAA000@
Is it possible that some of these are valid? Are these valid Message-Id:s
that are used repeatedly in certain spams or are these invalid Message-Id:s?
I must admit, I don't know much about this header!
Some of the header items you have, however, may cause problems. Are many of
them there simply because they should not be blank if they are present? Are
some here because they are not legal headers?
>Blacklist-Header: Apparently-From:
>Blacklist-Header: Bcc:
>Blacklist-Header: Comment: Authenticated sender is
>Blacklist-Header: Date-warning:
>Blacklist-Header: Mail-For:
>Blacklist-Header: Precedence: Non-Urgent
>Blacklist-Header: Precedence: Urgent
>Blacklist-Header: Precedence: special-delivery
>Blacklist-Header: Priority: Bulk
>Blacklist-Header: Priority: First-Class
>Blacklist-Header: Priority: Special-Delivery
>Blacklist-Header: Priority: high
>Blacklist-Header: Recieved:
>Blacklist-Header: Sent:
>Blacklist-Header: Status: MA
>Blacklist-Header: Warning: ActiveAgent
>Blacklist-Header: X-1:
>Blacklist-Header: X-:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Advertisement:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Advertisment:
>Blacklist-Header: X-AirNote:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Authenticated-Sender:
>Blacklist-Header: X-BlackMail:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Distribution:
>Blacklist-Header: X-EPUB-ID:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Flags:
>Blacklist-Header: X-ListServer:
This could be a valid header, unless blank. The List-Header group (which
seeks to standardize list-related email headers) has talked about using
ListServer: and it may be used as X-ListServer: in some list mail.
Of course, if you are not subscribed to an email list that uses it, then
this is a good check to make.
>Blacklist-Header: X-Note:
>Blacklist-Header: X-PMFLAG-:
>Blacklist-Header: X-PMFLAGS:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Shocking-Site:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Tagname:
>Blacklist-Header: X-UIDL:
The X-UIDL: is used by some email programs that use a pop-server. In
particular, Eudora uses this as a way of determining what messages to leave
on the server and what to delete. I have this header in _every_ message I
recieve!
However, if the mail program you use doesn't use UIDL or if you are
checking incoming mail before it gets the mail reader, this is probably a
good check.
>Blacklist-Header: X-UltraMail:
>Blacklist-Header: X-Visit:
>Blacklist-Header: X10:
>
>- -- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies,
>Inc.
>- -- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo:
>http://www.e-scrub.com/deadbolt/
>- -- Wpoison (web harvester poisoning) - demo: http://www.e-scrub.com/wpoison/
>
Ron,
Can you tell us something about how many false positives you get? How many
messages you get are picked up by these filters that are not spam?
Kent
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 15 13:00:45 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id MAA13149; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miso.wwa.com (miso.wwa.com [198.49.174.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with SMTP id MAA13112 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id:
From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin)
Subject: validity of Message-Id's
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:49:54 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: from "Kent S. Larsen II" at Oct 15, 97 01:26:36 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
Kent Larsen asked about Ronald Guilmette's list of spam markers:
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: RAF1
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: Mach10
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 19970237052
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 394810482832
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 505770395032
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 8a4d5eb172ca6d
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 21504739004014
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: <>
G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 0000000000.AAA000@
L> Is it possible that some of these are valid? Are these valid Message-Id:s
L> that are used repeatedly in certain spams or are these invalid Message-Id:s?
L> I must admit, I don't know much about this header!
They're all invalid. The contents of Message-Id: are (polite corrections
will be appreciated) supposed to be
a left-side-angle bracket
a non-empty string with no at signs, angle brackets, nor whitespace
an at sign
a site name, not necessarily an FQDN but an FQDN is a good idea
a right-side angle bracket
If the ID does not start with an "" or if it has any more ">"'s; character; if it does not
contain exactly one "@" or the "@" is second or second-to-last; or if it is
interrupted by any spaces, tabs, or line breaks, it is invalid. There may
be other requirements, but those are enough to exclude all of Ronald's
examples (or, since they're examples of bad ID's, perhaps I should say that
those rules include all of his examples).
From owner-list-managers-list Wed Oct 15 16:33:23 1997
Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970926-1) id PAA01750; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eagle.ns.net (eagle.ns.net [204.75.146.20]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970824-1) with ESMTP id PAA01665 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:37:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from monkeys.com (segfault.monkeys.com [204.119.242.200])
by eagle.ns.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA12186;
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by monkeys.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA20362;
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:43:10 -0700
To: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin)
cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM
Subject: Re: validity of Message-Id's
In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:49:54 -0500.
X-Copyright: (c) 1997 Ronald F. Guilmette; All rights reserved.
Reply-To: rfg@monkeys.com
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:43:10 -0700
Message-ID: <20359.876955390@monkeys.com>
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette"
Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM
Precedence: bulk
In message , you wrote:
>Kent Larsen asked about Ronald Guilmette's list of spam markers:
>
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: RAF1
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: Mach10
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 19970237052
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 394810482832
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 505770395032
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 8a4d5eb172ca6d
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 21504739004014
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: <>
>G> Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 0000000000.AAA000@
>
>L> Is it possible that some of these are valid? Are these valid Message-Id:s
>L> that are used repeatedly in certain spams or are these invalid Message-Id:s
>?
>L> I must admit, I don't know much about this header!
>
>They're all invalid. The contents of Message-Id: are (polite corrections
>will be appreciated) supposed to be
>
> a left-side-angle bracket
> a non-empty string with no at signs, angle brackets, nor whitespace
> an at sign
> a site name, not necessarily an FQDN but an FQDN is a good idea
> a right-side angle bracket
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE read the online help pages for Deadbolt before you
try to interpret the meaning of any of the blacklist directives I have
posted. You are seriously misinterpreting their meaning.
In the above `Blacklist-Header:' directives, the stuff to the right of
the second colon on each line is used in a SUBSTRING MATCH operation.
Thus, the line:
Blacklist-Header: Message-Id: 8a4d5eb172ca6d
will cause *all* of the following actual header lines to be blacklisted
by my filter:
Message-Id: <8a4d5eb172ca6d@netcom.com>
Message-Id: <8a4d5eb172ca6d@>
Message-Id: <<